W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 1997

Re: CSS vs. transitional markup [was: No Subject]

From: Douglas Rand <drand@sgi.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 1997 10:45:24 -0400
Message-ID: <33E34804.2781@sgi.com>
To: David Perrell <davidp@earthlink.net>
CC: www-style@w3.org, Todd Fahrner <fahrner@pobox.com>
David Perrell wrote:
> You are not in accordance with the spec. From section 3.2, Cascading
> Order:
> ---------------------
> The UA may choose to honor other stylistic HTML attributes, for example
> 'ALIGN'. If so, these attributes are translated to the corresponding
> CSS rules with specificity equal to 1. The rules are assumed to be at
> the start of the author style sheet and may be overridden by subsequent
> style sheet rules. In a transition phase, this policy will make it
> easier for stylistic attributes to coexist with style sheets.
> ---------------------

And this is what I get for not being more involved.  This is not
particularly simple to implement in practice.  I keep the list of 
properties and values around,  but I haven't kept the specificity 
around,  so this is going to require a fairly real code change.

In fact it requires applying a mapping to the attributes,  and
the creation of some kind of temporary stylesheet.  It can't even
be hacked by putting some sort of internal id on the element and a
permanent change to the per-document stylesheet since the specificity
would be wrong, and consider that the map between attributes and
properties is different for each element.

I presume the reason for this is so a stylesheet page will use the
stylesheet when the UA is capable and fallback otherwise.  Nasty
stuff though.  Comments and hints from other implementors would be very
welcome.

Doug
-- 
Doug Rand				drand@sgi.com
Silicon Graphics/SSO			http://reality.sgi.com/drand
Disclaimer: These are my views,  SGI's views are in 3D
Received on Saturday, 2 August 1997 10:50:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:51 GMT