Consider the following:
<td class="datepickerDisabled"><a href="#"><span>12</span></a></td>
In my css, there are two rules that would match for this selector:
tbody.datepickerDays td:hover {
border-radius: 2px;
-moz-border-radius: 2px;
-webkit-border-radius: 2px;
background-color: #ddd;
}
And the second one is:
td.datepickerDisabled:hover {
background-color: white;
}
The second rule for setting background-color
to white
is not matched. I would think that would be the rule overriding the previous rule since it is more specific (cells with class datepickerDisabled
).
"0,0,2,2 vs 0,0,2,1. The first one clearly wins."
tbody Element d
.datepickerDays Class c
td Element d
:hover Pseudo-class c
= 0,0,2,2
td Element d
.datepickerDisabled Class c
:hover Pseudo-class c
= 0,0,2,1
If you do not understand this format, read http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/cascade.html#specificity:
A selector's specificity is calculated as follows:
- count 1 if the declaration is from is a 'style' attribute rather than a rule with a selector, 0 otherwise (= a) (In HTML, values of an element's "style" attribute are style sheet rules. These rules have no selectors, so a=1, b=0, c=0, and d=0.)
- count the number of ID attributes in the selector (= b)
- count the number of other attributes and pseudo-classes in the selector (= c)
- count the number of element names and pseudo-elements in the selector (= d) The specificity is based only on the form of the selector. In particular, a selector of the form "[id=p33]" is counted as an attribute selector (a=0, b=0, c=1, d=0), even if the id attribute is defined as an "ID" in the source document's DTD.
Concatenating the four numbers a-b-c-d (in a number system with a large base) gives the specificity.
If you prefer a picture source:
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With