Sent by Al Sparber on 7 August 2004 00:12
Jeroen Visser [ vizi ] wrote:
> Beside that: what is the advantage? The Project7 method as Al
> suggested doesn't really offer a big advantage over setting a base
> stylesheet (e.g. headers, copy text, lists and links only) with a
> <link> element, and serving the advanced stuff through an @import
> rule.
Of course it does. Think about it again.
Netscape 4 requires JavaScript to be running in order to process CSS.
If JavaScript is disabled then Netscape 4 sees no CSS - period. Modern
browsers are served a good style sheet via @import. Because Netscape 4
is out of the loop there is no need for a linked style sheet -
therefore, your main style sheet is totally dedicated to modern
browsers and you do not have to worry about conflicting rules in
multiple style sheets. Of course, the other bulletproof method is to
simply not give Netscape 4 a style sheet at all.
Our method allows for two discrete and autonomous style sheets: one
for modern browsers and one for Netscape 4. There are no overlaps. It
is meant for those of us who still need or want to provide minimal
styles for that old warhorse.
Does that help you to understand?
Al Sparber - PVII
http://www.projectseven.com
DW Extensions - Menu Systems - Tutorials - CSS FastPacks
---------------------------------------------------------
Webdev Newsgroup: news://forums.projectseven.com/pviiwebdev/
CSS Newsgroup: news://forums.projectseven.com/css/
RSS/XML Feeds: http://www.projectseven.com/xml/
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL-REMOVED]]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
