- From: Hakon Lie <howcome@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 23:34:00 +0100 (MET)
- To: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>
- Cc: w3c-wai-hc@w3.org (HC team)
Al Gilman writes:
> > 'Option 1' I take to be that which changes the definition of
> > !important; so that it only has effect when used within a
> > reader's style sheet (any use of !important; in an author's
> > style sheet would thus be ignored, and the author's rules would
> > all have normal weight, thereby giving precedence to the
> > reader's explicitly important rules). This is the option which
> > I prefer.
>
> Is it really necessary to nullify all use of !important by the author?
> Would it be sufficient if
>
> a) a !important asserted by the user beats a !important
> asserted before the document got to the user.
I don't see the difference. In both cases the cascade order will be:
user important
author important
author normal
user normal
> b) a !important beats any level of specificity.
It already does. Check cascade rule #2 vs #4 in [1]
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS1#cascading-order
> ??
no?
Regards,
-h&kon
H å k o n W i u m L i e
howcome@w3.org http://www.w3.org/people/howcome
World W i d e Web Consortium
Received on Friday, 19 December 1997 17:34:20 UTC