- From: Leif Arne Storset <lstorset@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 15:02:14 +0200
- To: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 14:27:29 +0200, Leif Arne Storset <lstorset@opera.com> wrote: > On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 16:50:28 +0200, Tab Atkins Jr. > <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:33 AM, Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@kozea.fr> >> wrote: >>> Selectors specificity is calculated from three integers a, b and c and: >>> >>>> Concatenating the three numbers a-b-c (in a number system with a >>>> large base) gives the specificity. >>> >>> My understanding is that "a large base" means one larger than any of >>> a, b and c. In other words, the final specificity is not a single >>> number but a tuple of 3 integers, compared in lexicographic order. >>> >>> Apparently, "a large base" is 256 in Gecko and WebKit: >>> >>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2809024/points-in-css-specificity/11934505#11934505 >>> http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4388649 >>> >>> I’m not sure about other engines. >> >> Opera too, I believe. > > Actually, our base is 24 (see attachment). It's just that we truncate > the count before concatenating. :j Should be base 25, obviously. Not that it matters much. > Having such a low limit could be considered a bug, but I think > dependending on specificities of class counts that high is rare/messed > up enough to be irrelevant, much like the Gecko/WebKit issue. Both ours > and other engines' assumptions could be proven wrong, of course. -- Leif Arne Storset Layout Developer, Opera Software Oslo, Norway
Received on Friday, 17 August 2012 13:02:48 UTC