W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 2001

Re: @version rule

From: George Lund <G.A.Lund@bigfoot.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 12:41:48 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <ta131PATlZY7IAJD@lundbooks.co.uk>
To: www-style@w3.org
In article <81E4A2BC03CED111845100104B62AFB50102A882@stagecoach.bts.co.u
k>, Dave J Woolley <david.woolley@bts.co.uk> writes
>What is really needed sometimes is the ability
>to have all or nothing processing, so that a fallback
>is applied for all attributes/pseudo elements if
>any is not implemented.

There are occasions when even a fully complaint browser would ignore a
CSS rule perhaps because of an !important rule from a user stylesheet.

What is needed is a mechanism for grouping CSS rules, such that either
they are all rules in the group are applied or none are. This would
allow user and author stylesheets to interact without the risk that a
setting in one, while not overriding the setting in another, render the
page unreadable. The present situation leaves a serious risk of this
happening especially when fixed positioning is used.

A mechanism for specifying an alternative (or even a series of
alternative) rule group(s) in the event of primary rule group failing
would be a useful addition that would also address the problem you
raise, perhaps.

I think I may have mentioned this idea before, but I don't recall anyone
responding to it.

-- 
George Lund
Received on Monday, 30 July 2001 14:39:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:10 GMT