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

Re: [css3] Specificity mechanism issue

From: Jens Meiert <jens.meiert@erde3.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 09:12:36 +0200 (MEST)
To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@dbaron.org>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <17737.1095145956@www29.gmx.net>

> > but assuming (this seems absolutely legitimate) the calculated
> > values for the specificity to be decimal, it turns out that the
> > specificity mechanism [...]
> 
> They're not, and this has been clear from CSS1: [...]
>
> I don't know of any specification that says it's not in a large base,
> so I don't see any changes (unless I'm misunderstanding your point).

Clear mistake, studiousness can cause too much assiduousness ;) -- I
remembered the concatenation here to be done with a delimiter (as in the CSS
2.1 specification [1]), and this obviously mislead me.

Nonetheless, this "lapsus" seems avoidable if the CSS 2.1 spec was in line
with the other recommendations [2-4] -- namely illustrationg the specificity
via e.g. "100" instead of "0,1,0,0".


Regards,
 Jens.


[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/cascade.html#specificity
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS1#cascading-order
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/cascade.html#specificity
[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/#specificity


-- 
Jens Meiert
Interface Architect (IxD)

http://meiert.com/
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2004 07:13:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:32 GMT