W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-hc@w3.org > October to December 1997

Re: CSS 2: priorities in cascading order

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 1997 23:03:20 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199712200403.XAA24906@access1.digex.net>
To: w3c-wai-hc@w3.org (HC team)
to follow up on what Hakon Lie said:
> 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.
> and Hakon Lie responds:
> I don't see the difference. In both cases the cascade order will be:
>     user important
>     author important
>     author normal
>     user normal

ASG:: The way I was interpreting "only has effect when used
within a user's stylesheets" I think that you would rather get

    user important
    author important | author normal
    user normal

as opposed to the four-step priority scheme.  That is the
difference that I perceived.

On the other hand, if we add !required and give the user
the edge in resolving !required conflicts we get something

    user required
    author required
    author important
    user important
    author normal
    user normal
    browser default

Is that the new-keyword option, give or take?

-- Al
Received on Friday, 19 December 1997 23:03:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:35:01 UTC