Re: Issue 1: Font-weight and headings
To: <email@example.com>, "E. Stephen Mack" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Issue 1: Font-weight and headings
From: "David Perrell" <email@example.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 1997 14:15:29 -0700
From firstname.lastname@example.org Sun Jul 27 17: 17:25 1997
X-Authentication-Warning: www10.w3.org: Host sweden-c.it.earthlink.net [220.127.116.11] claimed to be sweden.it.earthlink.net
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1161
E. Stephen Mack wrote:
> Which version of IE are both of you using? When I put that
> declaration in IE 4.0 platform preview 2 (no shell integration)
> on a Windows 95 system, the Headings are still rendered in their
> customary size for me.
Not wanting IE4p2 on my primary workstation if I can't also keep 3.02,
I am still using 3.02.
> IE 4.0pp2, on the other hand, keeps headings large and bold
> and emphasized text in italics. The entire document does
> take on sans-serif though, so I can see that this font
> property is inheriting its way down.
I think MS has stated there is a default stylesheet for IE4, so this
would definitely be the correct behavior if font-family were only
declared in HTML or BODY.
> At this point, I think it becomes ESSENTIAL for the UA to
> release their default style sheet. That will make working
> with style sheets much simpler.
In any case it looks like prudent authors will have to declare style
for all elements they use.
> Not necessarily, because font-style (normal | italic | oblique)
> comes before font-weight ( normal | bold | [etc.]) in the
> font syntax. Go back to your test document and put in
> an ADDRESS element and an EM element, then see what your
> version of IE does.
If inheritance overrides one, it should override all. But this is the
ancient 3.02, so inconsistency is normal.