Inconsistent use of :disabled and [disabled]

[MartijnCuppens]

As well :disabled as [disabled] are used.

bootstrap/scss/mixins/_buttons.scss

Lines 29 to 37 in fa3de5c

	&.disabled,
	&:disabled {
	color: color-yiq($background);
	background-color: $background;
	border-color: $border;
	}
	&:not([disabled]):not(.disabled):active,
	&:not([disabled]):not(.disabled).active,

It would be a bit more consistent to use :disabled everywhere.

[patrickhlauke]

the :not() pseudo selector cannot contain another pseudo-selector https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/:not#Syntax (unless SCSS allows for some fancy rewriting of the output to account for that?)

[MartijnCuppens]

As far as I know, :disabled is not a pseudo-element but a pseudo-class which is allowed in the not() selector.

[patrickhlauke]

ah, right you are, my mistake.

[patrickhlauke]

@MartijnCuppens #25317

[patrickhlauke]

agree that settling on :disabled looks cleaner, and it may remove the idea that you can just arbitrarily throw a disabled attribute on any old random element to have the styles kick in.