- From: Vadim Plessky <lucy-ples@mtu-net.ru>
- Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 10:15:06 +0400
- To: <www-style@w3.org>
On Wednesday 14 August 2002 3:04 am, Coises wrote: | [Tue, 13 Aug 2002 10:32:31 -0700] Tantek Çelik: | >Reread that last sentence quoted from CSS 2.1 above: | > | > "Note that non-CSS presentational hints had a higher weight in CSS2." | >This means that <FONT> 'bgcolor' etc. have LESS weight in CSS2.1. | > | >This is a good thing. | | I submit that the cascade rules (and, in fact, web standards in general) | are a means to an end, not an end in themselves. Whether the change is a | "good thing" or a "bad thing" is determined by what it would accomplish. | | In this case, the only thing I can see it would accomplish is to cause | user style sheets to interact with "legacy" pages differently than with | pages coded to contemporary standards. The only possible interpretation of | this as a "good thing" that I see is that you would choose to make users | pawns in a campaign to "deprecate" older standards by making legacy pages | display erratically. Perhaps you would consider that an achievement; I | would not. I *would* consider this as an achievement. Note that all browsers with significant market share (MS IE, Netscape/Mozilla, Konqueror, Opera) have both *standards* and *quirk* modes. In *quirk* mode, browser make its best to render page how *author* suggested it should look like, and doesn't follow standards. In *standards* mode, browser follows standards. And here arrival of CSS 2.1 is a *good thing*. It clarifies many *unclear* things in existing (CSS1, CSS2) specifications. Legacy pages would be displayed the same way as it were rendered before, unless they change <html> to HTML 4.0-Strict, XHTML 1.x or some other modern DTD. At some moment (2-3 years from now?), authors would consider switching to XHTML/XML, and they *will* face the fact that pages need to be corrected. And CSS 2.1 helps here. | | >This is what users/authors want (CSS _should_ | >override legacy non-CSS presentational hints). | | Author CSS overrides legacy non-CSS presentational hints in all existing | and proposed CSS specifications. The proposed change has no effect on | authors using CSS to control presentation. | | I question the assertion that users would want this. Please explain why | a user would want or expect the effect of entries in a user style sheet | to depend on whether the author specified presentation using CSS or HTML. | | >And this is what has been implemented. | | Not in IE 5-6 for Windows (which, as far as I can tell, implement | the cascade rules from CSS2 correctly); and not in Opera for Windows | (which treats the user style sheet as if it were the first imported author | style sheet --- that's inconsistent with any CSS specification). I don't | have experience with any other browsers, so I can't comment on them. If you have ready self-explaining testcase, I can test it in Konqueror and Mozilla, and provide input to you. May be, this will clarify a lot of things. :-) -- Vadim Plessky http://kde2.newmail.ru (English) 33 Window Decorations and 6 Widget Styles for KDE http://kde2.newmail.ru/kde_themes.html KDE mini-Themes http://kde2.newmail.ru/themes/
Received on Thursday, 15 August 2002 02:08:58 UTC