That's correct because they cascade. The benefit of specifying which stylesheet to inject into is that the gwt stylesheet can contain defaults which are in turn overridden at will in user defined stylesheets.
Currently it's a free for all with ordering being undpecified which makes it messy to start overriding some rules. On 04/04/2009,d at 2:33 PM, Ray Cromwell <cromwell...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 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 >> > 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> >> 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> 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> wrote: >>> >>> 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 >>> 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://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
