Re: Style sheet and Netscape

Sue Jordan wrote:

>Braden N. McDaniel wrote:
>> > > Not so. If the attribute of FONT is recognized at all, it
>> > would override the
>> > > color specified for BODY. Inheritance is the *default*
>> > behavior, when the
>> > > color for an element is not specified. In this case, it
>> > *is* specified.
>
>>From the cite you provide, this statement is refuted. Here it is:
>
>"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."
>
>The salient point is that the <FONT> declaration (which is in conflict
>with the style declaration), would be assumed to be at the start of the
>author style sheet, and would therefore be overridden.

Overridden by what? Only the color property for BODY was defined in the
stylesheet in the original example. The FONT element was an offspring of
BODY, and its color declaration would therefore override it. Assuming the
FONT color declaration to be at the start of the stylesheet, the style
declarations become:

  FONT { color: gray }
  BODY { color: blue }

FONT is not in conflict with the original poster's style declaration, and
the above declaration should produce 4.x Navigator's rendering.

If the poster wants to insure that 4.x Navigator will render the FONT
element in blue, then his actual style declarations should be:

  FONT, BODY { color: blue }

The _effective_ style declaration then becomes:

  FONT {color: gray }
  FONT, BODY {color: blue }

Non-CSS-supporting browsers will render the FONT element in gray,
CSS-supporting browsers will render it in blue.

For some reason a lot of people have a hard time seeing FONT as just another
inline element, subject to the same style rules.

David Perrell

Received on Tuesday, 4 August 1998 16:02:41 UTC