- From: Chris Moschini <cmoschini@myrealbox.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 10:08:42 -0400
- To: www-style@w3.org
Boris Zbarsky [bzbarsky@MIT.EDU] wrote: > Erk. The specificity flag is a property of rules. Your suggestion > would make the specificity of a rule as applied to the object depend on > the object. But I think expanding the Specificity flag could still work. Fitting with the existing approach, encountering an @rule() could be handled by adding a second instance of the rule requested with a different specificity flag and the caller's selector. To be concrete: div.section { color: red; } p.subsection { @rule( "div.section" ); color: blue; } Now, a UA might parse this as though there were 3 rules: div.section { color: red; } /* specFlag = 5011 */ p.subsection { color: red; } /* specFlag = 4011 */ p.subsection { color: blue; } /* specFlag = 5011 */ And continue into the DOM with these. Other than the expanded flag, this works with existing code. In the case of single property @rule()'s, the extra rule would copy just the one property, that is: li.info { color: green; border: 1px solid blue; } li.error { color: red; border: @rule( "li.info" ); } The UA might treat this as: li.info { color: green; border: 1px solid blue; } /* specFlag = 5011 */ li.error { border: 1px solid blue; } /* specFlag = 4011 */ li.error { color: red; } /* specFlag = 5011 */ -Chris "SoopahMan" Moschini http://hiveminds.info/ http://soopahman.com/
Received on Thursday, 23 October 2003 10:08:46 UTC