- From: Elliott Sprehn <esprehn@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 12:44:54 -0400
- To: Dmitry Turin <html60@narod.ru>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On May 18, 2007, at 8:58 AM, Dmitry Turin wrote:
>
> Good day, Dao.
> Excuse me for a long break.
>
> DG> <style>
> DG> a::before {
> DG> content: attr(a1) "\A" attr(a2) "\A" attr(a3) "\A" attr(a4);
> DG> }
> DG> </style>
>
> <style>
> record1::before { content: attr(name) attr(surname) }
> record2::before { content: attr(name) attr(surname) }
> </style>
> <body>
> <record1 name= surname= >
> <record2 name= surname= >
> </body>
>
> This way don't allow to specify styles for visualization of
> these attributes
> (like the following)
Sure it does.
record1::before {
content: attr(name) attr(surname);
color: red;
float: right;.
/* ... */
}
record2::before {
content: attr(name) attr(surname);
color: blue;
float: left;
/* ... */
}
You've always been able to style generated content in some manner.
CSS2.1 relaxed the restriction on display types and positioning as
well to allow even greater flexibility.
> [...]
>
> So we see, that michanism of property "content" is _essentially_
> narrower,
> than michanism of virtual tags. Virtual tag allow to use even
> pseudo-classes.
This works with generated content too.
record1::before:hover :record1::before:active etc. should all work.
> [...]
>
>
>
> Dmitry Turin
> http://html6.by.ru
> http://sql4.by.ru
> http://computer2.by.ru
>
>
Anyway, Isn't this best left up to the CSS WG? I don't think we have
the authority to specify new CSS selectors.
- Elliott
Received on Friday, 18 May 2007 16:52:05 UTC