Russ and I have discussed this at length and we have come to the opinion that the @import rule (when used in that manner) is indeed a hack but a harmless one.
The reasoning is that it exploits a bug or particular behaviour in a browser. In this case, older browsers don't understand it at all and they ignore it so that the real styles that will break them can be put in there safely. We believe (and maintain) that it is harmless as we can't envisage any browser manufacturer not obeying it in the future as it is actually the preferred method. Regards, Peter > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Harwood > Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 11:35 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks? > > media="screen" is not a hack, thats statin the proper display > device target for > the relavent stylesheet. > > Hacks are things like the IE Underscore hack, they tend to be > workarounds for CSS > properties that are not yet implemented in certain browsers > or that need slightly > differnt values, theres differnt hacks for each of the dodgy browsers. > > But you sould always look towards creating your site hack > free as that is the > best was to make sure its backward/forward and bloody even > sideways compatible! > > Hacks are for the Cowbot webdesigner who hasnt done his job > right in the first > place! ( or for a client thats given too much hassle and not > enough cash to make > the recode cost effective! ;] ) > > Mark > www.phunky.co.uk > > On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 23:11 , J4Web <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent: > > >Well; I am surprised, but pleased actually, that so many of > you are saying > >that hacks are not part of the Standards Arsenal. I had got > the impression > >that I needed to become familiar with gadzillian hacks and > be able to draw > >the appropriate one out of the woodwork every ten lines of > CSS code. But I > >am getting the message that one can produce Standards > Compliant pages > >without hacking. > > > >I am not quite totally convinced, though, and some of the > replies have gone > >in the direction of supporting a "big fat list", if not > including some > >hacks in standard templates. > > > >I wondered if there are some workarounds that people on this > list use > >habitually and forget they use them, so I did a quick sample > of some of the > >URLs at the bottom of peoples' posts and the only hack I > found so far (but > >I have not searched very thoroughly) was on the > webstandards.org.au site : > > > >@import > >url("/stylesheets/wsg_advanced.css"); > > > >media="screen" > > > >Is the import hack a candidate for first (or sole) item on > the list of > >standard hacks? > > > >It seems pretty essential to me to get version 4 browsers to degrade > >gracefully. > > > >I am enjoying learning from those who have been in this game > much longer > >than me. > > > >John > > > > > >The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > >See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > >for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > > > > > > > ***************************************************** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ***************************************************** > ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *****************************************************
