|
|
Posted by Alan J. Flavell on 02/25/06 22:38
On Sat, 25 Feb 2006, Toby Inkster wrote:
> If you control all of the HTML, then specifying something like:
>
> STRONG {
> color: red;
> background: transparent;
> }
>
> in CSS might make sense,
Ah, you say you "control all of the HTML": but who controls "all of"
the CSS?
At the very least, the /user/ has every right to cascade their own
stylesheet with the one provided by the author. And it wouldn't
surprise me if some kinds of service provider were to impose a
stylesheet of their own, in addition to what the author provides.
There's a long history of service-providers injecting
syntactically-invalid fragments of HTML into the web pages of their
customers, after all - who's stopping them from doing much the same
with stylesheets?
And it's not unknown for corporates to insist on their corporate
stylesheet being applied for house consistency. Their management can
decree at any moment a complete change of the house style - so a
one-off exercise of ensuring that the author's styles jive well with
the *current* corporate stylesheet is by no means a complete solution.
> But if there are multiple markup authors, then
> "background:transparent" might be almost as useless as not
> specifying a background at all.
Well, a transparent background is the "initial value"; so the only
difference between specifying it and not specifying it is the question
of what priority it gets in the cascade.
cheers
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|