You can get the CssRule/CSSStyleDeclaration as text via the cssText property, but AFAIK, there is no property on document.styleSheets[n] that allows setting the whole stylesheet at once using text. If there is, it's certainly not part of the W3C DOM CSS OM. -Ray
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Miroslav Pokorny <miroslav.poko...@gmail.com > wrote: > One does not have to add the rules one by one. If I recall it is possible > to get the entire content of a stylesheet using the "css" property append > your new rules and update that property. I'm pretty sure you can do > basically the same thing in all browsers. > > Ti > > On 04/04/2009, at 10:56 AM, Ray Cromwell <cromwell...@gmail.com> wrote: > > It seems to me that calling addRule/insertRule a hundred times would be > pretty slow (just look how many rules are in the GWT Theme CSS), not to > mention there are cross-browser issues to deal with, when a simple, > well-tested, mechanism exists already. Sometimes doing the 'proper' thing is > not an improvement (e.g. not using tables for layout because it's "wrong") > > -Ray > > > On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Miroslav Pokorny <<miroslav.poko...@gmail.com> > miroslav.poko...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> This is probably the wrong time to ask -but updating styles via the >> addition of style tags seems very limiting. >> >> If I recall IE (cant recall which vetsion was probably 7) chokes when a >> page has more than thirty odd style elements. >> >> Why not add new rules using StyleSheet.addRule/insertRule or appending the >> new CSS to a particular stylesheet's CSS ? Using style elements to "append" >> to a stylesheet seems a hack when proper mechanisms exist. >> >> If the StyleInjector bundle included a mechanism to say which stylesheet >> to modify. >> >> On 04/04/2009, at 8:49 AM, Ray Cromwell < <cromwell...@gmail.com> >> cromwell...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> I believe so. I don't see any harm. Personally, I think if you don't have >> a <head>, your page is broken, since you don't even get a <title>, but it >> would be nice to either throw an informative exception, or inject a head in >> this circumstance. >> -Ray >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Ray Ryan < >> <rj...@google.com><rj...@google.com> >> rj...@google.com> wrote: >> >>> Can we add safely add head if we don't find it? >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 2:43 PM, < >>> <cromwell...@gmail.com><cromwell...@gmail.com> >>> cromwell...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> <http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/15803/diff/4001/4004><http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/15803/diff/4001/4004> >>>> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/15803/diff/4001/4004 >>>> File user/src/com/google/gwt/dom/client/StyleInjector.java (right): >>>> >>>> >>>> <http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/15803/diff/4001/4004#newcode35><http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/15803/diff/4001/4004#newcode35> >>>> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/15803/diff/4001/4004#newcode35 >>>> Line 35: "head").getItem(0)); >>>> I mentioned this in another review, but this common idiom can fail if >>>> the user doesn't have a <head> element, which is certainly legal. Some >>>> browsers automatically insert a <head> if it's missing, but some don't. >>>> I guess we could simply declare we don't support leaving out head. >>>> >>>> Might be good to assert head != null >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> <http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/15803><http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/15803> >>>> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/15803 >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
