W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 1995

Notational Misunderstanding (was Re: Oversize / Dropped Caps and Initials)

From: Brother Baker <applemac@frank.mtsu.edu>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 13:07:52 -0500 (CDT)
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-style@www10.w3.org>
Message-Id: <Pine.HPP.3.91.950711123153.15788D-100000@frank.mtsu.edu>
On Tue, 11 Jul 1995, Benjamin C. W. Sittler wrote, considering notation:

> I would say that the ordering is correct... big.font and plain font is
> the most general, .size the most specific.

Forgive me.  But, I don't understand.
Can someone help me?

I would think that if not "font.size.big" then it would AT LEAST be 
"font.big.size".  I mean, the most general seems to be plain "font", 
followed either by size or big.  Why the other way around?

I seem to understand you, by using this notation, to mean that if 
"[.]font[.]" were anywhere within the classification, then the current 
class should have its attributes cascaded from "font".  I do NOT 
find it intuitive to say that.

If you say "big.font.size", _I_ would expect the set of "big.img", 
"big.font", "big.whatever" to inherit from "big".  (Which I don't 
REALLY think makes a lot of sense.)
(Or maybe, _I_ don't make sense.  Am I just confused?)

			--James Baker / http://www.mtsu.edu/~applemac
			  MTCSC Home /  http://www.mtsu.edu/~mtcsc
Received on Tuesday, 11 July 1995 14:10:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:37 UTC