Re: Problems/Question with Cougar

Scott E. Preece (preece@predator.urbana.mcd.mot.com)
Tue, 3 Sep 1996 15:09:40 -0500


Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 15:09:40 -0500
Message-Id: <199609032009.PAA10950@predator.urbana.mcd.mot.com>
From: "Scott E. Preece" <preece@predator.urbana.mcd.mot.com>
To: abigail@uk.fnx.com
CC: www-html@w3.org
In-reply-to: Abigail's message of Tue, 03 Sep 1996 20:23:37 +0100
Subject: Re: Problems/Question with Cougar

  From: Abigail <abigail@uk.fnx.com>

| > Well, like anything else, the 'last defined' colour should be the
| > over-riding one.
| > 
| > It's as simple as that, isn't it???
| 
| Uhm, no. That would mean the order of attributes is important.
| It might be that SGML says it is, but I have never heard of it.
| I would image implementations of HTML parsers differ wether 
| order of attributes is important or not. If I were to make a
| parser, I'd put attributes of an element in an associative
| array - which usually loses the order.
---

The order of SGML attributes is not the issue - the issue is the
interplay between SGML attributes and CSS1 properties.  The text of CSS1
is reasonably clear:
 
| A 'STYLE' attribute on an element (see section 1.1 for an example)
| should be considered as if an ID attribute had been specified at the end
| of the style sheet.
| 
| The UA may choose to honor other stylistic attributes (e.g. 'ALIGN') as
| if a 'STYLE' attribute had been used. When in conflict with other
| stylistic attributes, the 'STYLE' attribute should win.

In a formal standard I would expect balloting to have determined whether
that "should" was simply sloppy (and was intended to mean "shall") or
whether it was intentionally making the text non-normative.

scott

--
scott preece
motorola/mcg urbana design center	1101 e. university, urbana, il   61801
phone:	217-384-8589			  fax:	217-384-8550
internet mail:	preece@urbana.mcd.mot.com