[selectors-4] Target elements or target elements?

[domenic]

https://drafts.csswg.org/selectors-4/#the-target-pseudo

The :target pseudo-class matches the document’s target elements. If the document’s URL has no fragment identifier, then the document has no target element.

The intention seems to be that a document can have multiple target elements. (HTML can only have one, but I can see CSS wanting to stay general, for whatever reason.)

If so, the last sentence should probably be "the document has no target elements".

This is causing minor confusion in https://github.com/whatwg/html/pull/1370/files/6048d915035fefd69e31f903beac6f53356e4462#r65485805

[tabatkins]

I believe it's valid in English to be singular or plural there? (Your link is invalid.)

[domenic]

I don't think it makes sense to refer to it in the plural in one sentence, then singular in the next. Let's try:

"The fluffy descriptor matches Domenic's fluffy dogs. If Domenic's dogs are shaved, then Domenic has no fluffy dog."

I guess this is technically true, but still pretty confusing...

[tabatkins]

That sounds 100% fine to me.

(That said, I have zero objection to adding an s to that word. I'll do so in a moment.)

[upsuper]

A bit out of topic: using plural reminds me that it is possible that a page may actually want multiple targets, for example, in code viewing, you may want to select several lines e.g. L5-L10. But I guess something like this is hard to spec given the current situation...

[tabatkins]

Nothing wrong with it - HTML currently defines that the target element is just the one referred to by the hash, but we also have special-purpose fragments (Media Fragments) and so there's nothing theoretically stopping us from having a special-purpose fragment that can hit multiple elements.