By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
438,767 Members | 1,198 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 438,767 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

simpler way to do do h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6

P: n/a
Is there a wild card way to style all headings at once or do I have
to do this

h1,h2,h3,h4,h5{color: #123456}

I know it's a silly question but it would sidestep an IE DOM issue I
have.

Jeff
Jan 29 '08 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
15 Replies


P: n/a
Jeff wrote:
Is there a wild card way to style all headings at once or do I have
to do this

h1,h2,h3,h4,h5{color: #123456}
You have to do that.
--
David Dorward
http://dorward.me.uk/
http://blog.dorward.me.uk/
Jan 29 '08 #2

P: n/a
On 29 Jan, 23:49, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.comwrote:
do I have to do this

h1,h2,h3,h4,h5{color: #123456}
This _is_ simple. What you don't like about it is _verbosity_, not
lack of simplicity.

For some very good reasons, CSS does try to be simple, but doesn't try
to avoid verbosity. If you really want to _understand_ the decisions
behind such compromises, read Hakon Lie's PhD thesis.
Jan 30 '08 #3

P: n/a
Andy Dingley wrote:
On 29 Jan, 23:49, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.comwrote:
>do I have to do this

h1,h2,h3,h4,h5{color: #123456}

This _is_ simple. What you don't like about it is _verbosity_, not
lack of simplicity.
Actually what I don't like is that IE does not grok this:

StyleSheetReference.addRule('h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6','c olor: red')

And I'm not too thrilled about snipping posts without marking that
you've done that because the way you've snipped obscures that the post
was about DOM manipulation.

If you really have any interest in this, you can read my reply to Yucca.

Jeff
>
For some very good reasons, CSS does try to be simple, but doesn't try
to avoid verbosity. If you really want to _understand_ the decisions
behind such compromises, read Hakon Lie's PhD thesis.
Jan 30 '08 #4

P: n/a
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:14:06 -0500, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.comwrote:
>the post was about DOM manipulation.
Not when you post it to c.i.w.a.s it isn't.

Also look up very carefully what the definition of "rule" is in CSS.
That may shed some light on IE's thinking behind how their DOM method
works.
Jan 31 '08 #5

P: n/a
On 31 Jan, 07:01, Steve Swift <Steve.J.Sw...@gmail.comwrote:
I'd be tempted to colour the header levels according to the
colours of the rainbow (Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo) except
that I'm never quite sure what colour "Indigo" is.
There's not really any such distinct colour. Rainbows just have 6
colours (derived from the interactions of our 3 sorts of colour-
sensing cones). However Newton was a crazy alchemist and numerologist,
who thought that 7 was simply a "better" number, so he split the
"purplish" part in two.

If you're a tetrachromat, you might see more colours than this.
Jan 31 '08 #6

P: n/a
On 2008-01-31, Andy Dingley <di*****@codesmiths.comwrote:
On 31 Jan, 07:01, Steve Swift <Steve.J.Sw...@gmail.comwrote:
>I'd be tempted to colour the header levels according to the
colours of the rainbow (Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo) except
that I'm never quite sure what colour "Indigo" is.

There's not really any such distinct colour. Rainbows just have 6
colours (derived from the interactions of our 3 sorts of colour-
sensing cones). However Newton was a crazy alchemist and numerologist,
who thought that 7 was simply a "better" number, so he split the
"purplish" part in two.

If you're a tetrachromat, you might see more colours than this.
I thought only women could be tetrachromats.
Jan 31 '08 #7

P: n/a
On 31 Jan, 15:37, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggswrote:
If you're a tetrachromat, you might see more colours than this.

I thought only women could be tetrachromats.
I believe that since the Suffragettes, we even allow women to post to
Usenet.

Naturally you wouldn't want your servants or sisters to be reading it
though.
Jan 31 '08 #8

P: n/a
Andy Dingley wrote:
On 31 Jan, 15:37, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggswrote:
>>If you're a tetrachromat, you might see more colours than this.
I thought only women could be tetrachromats.

I believe that since the Suffragettes, we even allow women to post to
Usenet.
But it's unlikely that any of them is named Steve Smith.
Jan 31 '08 #9

P: n/a
On 2008-01-31, Andy Dingley <di*****@codesmiths.comwrote:
On 31 Jan, 15:37, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggswrote:
If you're a tetrachromat, you might see more colours than this.

I thought only women could be tetrachromats.

I believe that since the Suffragettes, we even allow women to post to
Usenet.

Naturally you wouldn't want your servants or sisters to be reading it
though.
My next question is if I have a web page whose content I want to be only
accessible by tetrachromats, what combination of background-color and
color should I use?
Jan 31 '08 #10

P: n/a
Ben C wrote:
On 2008-01-31, Andy Dingley <di*****@codesmiths.comwrote:
>On 31 Jan, 15:37, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggswrote:
>>>If you're a tetrachromat, you might see more colours than this.
I thought only women could be tetrachromats.
I believe that since the Suffragettes, we even allow women to post to
Usenet.

Naturally you wouldn't want your servants or sisters to be reading it
though.

My next question is if I have a web page whose content I want to be only
accessible by tetrachromats, what combination of background-color and
color should I use?
Tetrachromats have an extra cone somewhere between red and green in
the orange area. Where that is varies from individual to individual with
some being very close to the original red cone. You would want shades
around orange, if I read that correctly.
Jeff

Jan 31 '08 #11

P: n/a
On 2008-01-31, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.comwrote:
Ben C wrote:
>On 2008-01-31, Andy Dingley <di*****@codesmiths.comwrote:
>>On 31 Jan, 15:37, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggswrote:

If you're a tetrachromat, you might see more colours than this.
I thought only women could be tetrachromats.
I believe that since the Suffragettes, we even allow women to post to
Usenet.

Naturally you wouldn't want your servants or sisters to be reading it
though.

My next question is if I have a web page whose content I want to be only
accessible by tetrachromats, what combination of background-color and
color should I use?

Tetrachromats have an extra cone somewhere between red and green in
the orange area. Where that is varies from individual to individual with
some being very close to the original red cone. You would want shades
around orange, if I read that correctly.
But wouldn't they need monitors with four kinds of pixel, rather than
just the usual red, green and blue?
Jan 31 '08 #12

P: n/a
Ben C wrote:
On 2008-01-31, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.comwrote:
>Ben C wrote:
>>On 2008-01-31, Andy Dingley <di*****@codesmiths.comwrote:
On 31 Jan, 15:37, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggswrote:

>If you're a tetrachromat, you might see more colours than this.
I thought only women could be tetrachromats.
I believe that since the Suffragettes, we even allow women to post to
Usenet.

Naturally you wouldn't want your servants or sisters to be reading it
though.
My next question is if I have a web page whose content I want to be only
accessible by tetrachromats, what combination of background-color and
color should I use?
Tetrachromats have an extra cone somewhere between red and green in
the orange area. Where that is varies from individual to individual with
some being very close to the original red cone. You would want shades
around orange, if I read that correctly.

But wouldn't they need monitors with four kinds of pixel, rather than
just the usual red, green and blue?
I don't think so, color space is a weird thing. Monitor color space
tends to be much greater than print. But it will, of course, vary from
monitor to monitor.

Jeff
Feb 1 '08 #13

P: n/a
On 31 Jan, 19:59, Ben C <spams...@spam.eggswrote:
My next question is if I have a web page whose content I want to be only
accessible by tetrachromats, what combination of background-color and
color should I use?
@media 4-gunned-crt {
* {
background-color: octarine;
}
}
Feb 1 '08 #14

P: n/a
On 31 Jan, 18:46, Harlan Messinger <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net>
wrote:
I thought only women could be tetrachromats.
But it's unlikely that any of them is named Steve Smith.
The OP is Steve Swift.

And: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stevie_Smith>
Feb 1 '08 #15

P: n/a
Andy Dingley wrote:
On 31 Jan, 18:46, Harlan Messinger <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net>
wrote:
>>>I thought only women could be tetrachromats.
>But it's unlikely that any of them is named Steve Smith.

The OP is Steve Swift.
Um, yeah. I know a Steve Smith, so I guess my brain went into autopilot.
Same point, though.
And: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stevie_Smith>
"An 'i'," said the queen. "If I didn't have one I'd be king."
Feb 1 '08 #16

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.