- From: Jeffrey Yasskin <jyasskin@hotmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 15:13:57 -0500
- To: www-style@w3.org
I would be happy with this. I'm glad my suggestion is producing a workable solution, even if it wasn't the one I originally thought of. (Which I now see wasn't workable) Jeffrey Yasskin >From: Stuart Ballard <sballard@netreach.com> >To: George Lund <G.A.Lund@bigfoot.com> >CC: www-style@w3.org >Subject: Re: @version rule >Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 14:53:51 -0400 > >George Lund wrote: > > > > What is needed is a mechanism for grouping CSS rules, such that either > > they are all rules in the group are applied or none are. This would > > allow user and author stylesheets to interact without the risk that a > > setting in one, while not overriding the setting in another, render the > > page unreadable. The present situation leaves a serious risk of this > > happening especially when fixed positioning is used. > >Seems to me that this would also be entirely consistent with backward >compatibility; eg: > >@combine { > selector1 { attr1: val1 }; > selector2 { attr2: val2 }; >} > >If the defined behavior for "@combine" was "either all should succeed or >all should fail", then it would be interpreted correctly by UAs that >don't understand @combine: all would fail! > >Thoughts? Anyone in the WG think this is an idea worth pursuing, or >should we all just give up and go home? > >Stuart. > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Received on Monday, 30 July 2001 16:14:28 UTC