W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2004

Re: [css3-page] LCWD issue 23 -- [23] Section 3.4.1 Example

From: Ernest Cline <ernestcline@mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 10:52:11 -0500
Message-ID: <410-22004219155211468@mindspring.com>
To: "Michael Day" <mikeday@yeslogic.com>
Cc: "W3C CSS List" <www-style@w3.org>




> [Original Message]
> From: Michael Day <mikeday@yeslogic.com>
> To: Ernest Cline <ernestcline@mindspring.com>
> Cc: W3C CSS List <www-style@w3.org>
> Date: 2/9/2004 11:43:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [css3-page] LCWD issue 23 --  [23] Section 3.4.1 Example
>
>
> > @page :first {span {color:blue}}
> > @page :right {span {color:red}}
>
> Surely no level of CSS allows element selectors to be nested within page 
> rules in this way?

You're right, the grammar says declaration not ruleset

however one can easily modify my examples to:

@page :first {background:blue}
@page :right {background:red}

and

@page :right {background:red}
@page :first {background:blue}

If :first and :right acted like other pseudo-classes the order of the
rules (since they have equal specificity) would determine
whether a right first page had a red or a blue background.
Instead, because CSS2 insists that rules in :first always take
precedence over :right, a right first page should have a blue
background with either example.  It would be more practical
to change the terminology than to change existing CSS2 behavior
so that :first, :left, and :right acted like regular pseudo-classes.

I am not asking for any change in behavior or rule interpretation,
just that :first, :left and :right not be called pseudo-classes.
Received on Monday, 9 February 2004 10:52:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:26 GMT