Re: CSS 2: priorities in cascading order

Al Gilman writes:

 > > 'Option 1' I take to be that which changes the definition of
 > > !important; so that it only has effect when used within a
 > > reader's style sheet (any use of !important; in an author's
 > > style sheet would thus be ignored, and the author's rules would
 > > all have normal weight, thereby giving precedence to the
 > > reader's explicitly important rules). This is the option which
 > > I prefer.
 > 
 > Is it really necessary to nullify all use of !important by the author?
 > Would it be sufficient if
 > 
 > 	a) a !important asserted by the user beats a !important
 > 	asserted before the document got to the user.

I don't see the difference. In both cases the cascade order will be:
    
    user important
    author important
    author normal
    user normal

 > 	b) a !important beats any level of specificity.

It already does. Check cascade rule #2 vs #4 in [1]

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS1#cascading-order

 > ??

no?

Regards,

-h&kon

H   å   k   o   n      W   i   u   m       L   i   e
howcome@w3.org      http://www.w3.org/people/howcome
World     W      i     d     e       Web  Consortium