- From: Charles-André Landemaine <landemaine@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 17:09:55 +0100
- To: Christopher Schmitt <schmitt@christopher.org>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Christopher Schmitt
<schmitt@christopher.org> wrote:
> I understand, but I raise two questions:
>
> 1) Shouldn't this be for browsers vendors to implement on their own? For
> example, Opera apparently has a solution (see
> http://userstyles.org/styles/installing )
Firefox has already, but if we let browser vendors go further, all of
them will have their own synthax, and sharing user styles will be
painful, having to maintain various versions for different browsers.
Actually Opera doesn't have a real solution. You can only resort to
user scripts to implement user styles with the possibility to filter
by domain name. The only way I know is this:
if(top.location.hostname.indexOf("example.com")!=-1){
var style = document.createElement("style");
document.getElementsByTagName("head")[0].appendChild(style);
var sheet = style.sheet;
sheet.insertRule("body{background:#c00}",sheet.cssRules.length);
}
> 2) Wouldn't the Mozilla Firefox syntax be better suited, if this was to be
> included in the CSS specification, than the one you suggested?
I like my synthax, it looks like old-school pseudo classes
(http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/#selectors), it's simple to
understand and to remember. If we go the FF-synthax route, we would at
least have to remove the -moz prefix (that can be considered
branding).
Charles-André Landemaine.
Received on Monday, 9 February 2009 16:10:30 UTC