From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>
Subject: Re: Hyperlinks!
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 23:05:00 +0200
Message-ID: <87blnvumf7.fsf@elephly.net>
References: <87eesrlkil.fsf@gnu.org> <20200413132638.1ce12721@scratchpost.org>
 <87d08buujt.fsf@elephly.net> <20200413203819.63e0c525@scratchpost.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37292)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <rekado@elephly.net>) id 1jO6GX-0005GH-7U
 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 17:05:14 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <rekado@elephly.net>) id 1jO6GV-0006aG-2p
 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 17:05:13 -0400
Received: from sender4-of-o53.zoho.com ([136.143.188.53]:21360)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
 (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <rekado@elephly.net>) id 1jO6GT-0006Y9-Sv
 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 17:05:11 -0400
In-reply-to: <20200413203819.63e0c525@scratchpost.org>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
 <guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
 <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
 <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-devel"
 <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
To: Danny Milosavljevic <dannym@scratchpost.org>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org


Danny Milosavljevic <dannym@scratchpost.org> writes:

> Hi Ricardo,
>
> On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 20:09:26 +0200
> Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> wrote:
>
>> Danny Milosavljevic <dannym@scratchpost.org> writes:
>>=20
>> > On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 12:58:42 +0200
>> > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
>> >=20=20
>> >> (If anyone knows how to get =E2=80=98a.syntax-symbol=E2=80=99 CSS dif=
ferent from just
>> >> =E2=80=98a=E2=80=99, I=E2=80=99m all ears!)=20=20
>> [=E2=80=A6]
>> > a.syntax-symbol {
>> >  color: red;
>> > }
>> > a:not(.syntax-symbol) {
>> >  background-color: blue;
>> > }=20=20
>>=20
>> The first definition would suffice if it came after any style definition
>> for just =E2=80=9Ca=E2=80=9D.
>
> 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)

Oh, thanks for the clarification.  I must have misunderstood Ludo=E2=80=99s=
 request.

--=20
Ricardo