[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

cc:Mail Link to SMTP Undeliverable Message



Message is undeliverable.
Reason: User "brad_chase@met.bitstream.com" is not found in the cc:Mail Directory.
Original text follows:
---------------------

Received: from www19.w3.org by met.bitstream.com (ccMail Link to SMTP R8.00.00)
	; Mon, 04 Aug 97 12:35:49 -0500
Return-Path: <www-style-request@w3.org>
Received: by www19.w3.org (8.8.5/8.6.12) id MAA07240; Mon, 4 Aug 1997 12:26:57 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 12:26:57 -0400 (EDT)
Resent-Message-Id: <199708041626.MAA07240@www19.w3.org>
Message-ID: <41F7F4CE3CA2CF11BC5000805F14B2A9023AC006@RED-31-MSG.dns.microsoft.com>
From: "Chris Wilson (PSD)" <cwilso@MICROSOFT.com>
To: "'David Perrell'" <davidp@earthlink.net>, Douglas Rand <drand@sgi.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org, Todd Fahrner <fahrner@pobox.com>
Subject: RE: CSS vs. transitional markup [was: No Subject]
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 09:26:18 -0700
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49)
X-List-URL: http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Archives/Public/www-style/
Resent-From: www-style@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <www-style@w3.org> archive/latest/2700
X-Loop: www-style@w3.org
Sender: www-style-request@w3.org
Resent-Sender: www-style-request@w3.org
Precedence: list

Hmm, I think I agree with you, with a slight amendment.  I believe
precedence order, from most preferred to least preferred, should go like
this:

Inline styles
author stylesheet
user stylesheet
HTML attributes & intrinsic HTML element properties (e.g., BLOCKQUOTE is
indented)

The change is where HTML properties are handled WRT user stylesheets.
This allows the user greater control.

	-Chris
Chris Wilson
cwilso@microsoft.com
***

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	David Perrell [SMTP:davidp@earthlink.net]
> Sent:	Friday, August 01, 1997 3:35 PM
> To:	Douglas Rand
> Cc:	www-style@w3.org; Todd Fahrner
> Subject:	Re: CSS vs. transitional markup [was: No Subject]
> 
> Douglas Rand wrote:
> > In our browser,  the FONT declarations would override the parent. 
> CSS1
> > decls for the FONT tag itself would first be honored,  then the
> > attributes.  I treat attributes in essentially the same fashion as a
> > STYLE attribute.
> > 
> > So my view is that indeed the inline attributes of the FONT should
> > override the parent.  For my own implementation it also means that
> the
> > style object associated with FONT and any children's style object
> > inheriting cannot be cached.  Ah well.
> 
> You are not in accordance with the spec. From section 3.2, Cascading
> Order:
> ---------------------
> The UA may choose to honor other stylistic HTML attributes, for
> example
> 'ALIGN'. If so, these attributes are translated to the corresponding
> CSS rules with specificity equal to 1. The rules are assumed to be at
> the start of the author style sheet and may be overridden by
> subsequent
> style sheet rules. In a transition phase, this policy will make it
> easier for stylistic attributes to coexist with style sheets.
> ---------------------
> 
> Key sentence: "The rules are assumed to be at the start of the author
> style sheet and may be overridden by subsequent style sheet rules."
> IE3.02 is handling inline HTML properties correctly.
> 
> David Perrell