- From: John Lewis <lewi0371@mrs.umn.edu>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 19:40:50 -0500
- To: www-style@w3.org
Ernest wrote on Tuesday, June 3, 2003 at 7:06:54 PM: > I presume that the intention is to provide a mechanism whereby it is > easy to determine which row and column a cell belongs to. However, > how does the use of :hover to do this achieve this when the page is > printed and interactive pseudo-classes such as :hover are not > available? It doesn't. Nor does it do so for links or any other type of element. I think applying *:hover to only certain elements in inconsistent. For example, why not let authors use :link:hover if that's what they mean? In this fashion, two behaviors are possible. Saying :hover applies only to certain elements means that applying it to other elements is impossible. That sucks, especially now that certain browsers (Mozilla, Opera, others?) have given CSS authors a taste of what's possible. I like what Opera 7 did. Since some authors think :hover only applies to links, probably because that's how Win IE behaves, Opera made it so the :hover selector applies only to links, while the *:hover selector applies to everything, and tr:hover applies to tr elements. This is perhaps sacreligous, but it works well in the real world. Knowledgable authors can be sure to use *:hover instead of :hover if that's what they mean, and people who have no idea what they're doing can continue to use :hover without problems. It's inconsistent, maybe a little confusing, and I'm sure there's at least one document it messes up, but for the most part it works. If CSS is going to say what :hover does and doesn't apply to, I think behavior similar to Opera's should be considered. -- John Lewis
Received on Tuesday, 3 June 2003 20:41:45 UTC