Re: Issue 1: Font-weight and headings

Liam wrote:

>I'm not sure that all elements used should have all (applicable) CSS
>properties set.  An exhaustive style sheet would override all (non-
>!important) user styles, which seems to go against the idea of Cascading
>Style Sheets.  I recognize that the cascade does not always give optimal
>results, but I think that we have to trust it, or at least give it a
>chance with some real implementations.

Any author would still have that option, of course. IMO, users probably
should declare all truly important rendering features !important, anyway,
and let the rest apply only to unstyled material.

>As an author, I don't want to have to decide every single style for the
>user.  There are some properties that the user is able to decide better
>than me.

So you don't have to: you accept the defaults, which the user may choose to
override. This stylesheet would simply express the defaults for those who
wish to avoid nasty collisions. I see nothing wrong with user style sheets
chock full of !important declarations, btw. Odd UAs will need them.

>>Not a "designery" one, but one representing typical
>>out-of-the-box rendering of all HTML elements in the dominant browsers.
>>We'll know we're done when we can't tell whether it's being appled or not
>>(assuming correct CSS implementations, of course, and no changes to user
>Then what we're doing is trying to defeat the cascade.  If we dislike the
>cascade this much, perhaps it'd be better to attack the problem at the
>source and change the cascading model of CSS.  (FWIW, I'm satisfied with
>the cascade.)

FWIW, I think a user's !important declaration should have highest weight.
There's no need for an authorial !important when author's normal
declarations enjoy pride of place anyway.

Todd Fahrner

The printed page transcends space and time. The printed page, the
infinitude of books, must be transcended. THE ELECTRO-LIBRARY.

--El Lissitzky, 1923