[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Hyperlinks!
From: |
Danny Milosavljevic |
Subject: |
Re: Hyperlinks! |
Date: |
Mon, 13 Apr 2020 20:38:19 +0200 |
Hi Ricardo,
On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 20:09:26 +0200
Ricardo Wurmus <address@hidden> wrote:
> Danny Milosavljevic <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 12:58:42 +0200
> > Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> >> (If anyone knows how to get ‘a.syntax-symbol’ CSS different from just
> >> ‘a’, I’m all ears!)
> […]
> > a.syntax-symbol {
> > color: red;
> > }
> > a:not(.syntax-symbol) {
> > background-color: blue;
> > }
>
> The first definition would suffice if it came after any style definition
> for just “a”.
Yeah, but the behavior would be different.
I thought Ludo meant that he wanted the rules for just "a" not to apply to
"a.syntax-symbol". With your version the rules for just "a" and the ones
for "a.syntax-symbol" would totally both apply to "a.syntax-symbol"s.
In my version, the "with class" text doesn't have a blue background.
In yours, it would have.
(I'd agree that it's often overkill)
pgp08JqRZVtOP.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Hyperlinks!, Vincent Legoll, 2020/04/13
Re: Hyperlinks!, Vincent Legoll, 2020/04/13
Re: Hyperlinks!, Vincent Legoll, 2020/04/13