I need to increase class specifity of a given class selector.
Example:
.test {
color: #fff;
}
At the moment i need to type .test.test to increase specifity.
Is there another approach to solve this, like a function increase() or some other way of increasing it without appending the same classname?
If you're using SCSS, then the simplest way (besides forcing it with !important) is to include a parent selector so that it has a higher specificity:
.parent {
.test {
color: #fff;
}
}
Another method is to target the element as well (if it's always the same type of element). This would also give it a higher specificity.
div.test {
color: #fff;
}
If all else fails, you can try moving the code block lower in the SCSS file, since the last selector in the document will win if they have the same specificity. Or, give it the good ol' !important at the end.
.test {
color: #fff !important;
}
there are multiple approaches:
- You can use !important, so that you do not need to repeat class twice. but this is a bad practice.
- Best way - you can place the class code in the last so that even if the specificity is equal, last one will override previous.
- you can use parent selector or tag selector, but that makes code dependent on that parent or tag.
- you can learn more about specificity on https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Specificity
Related
Is it possible to make the entire .class CSS selector important? I'm thinking in this kind of structure:
.custom-selector !important {
display: inline-block;
vertical-align: middle;
position: relative;
padding-left: 5px;
}
I don't know if it's possible.
No, it's not possible. !important is thought to be an instrument of last resort and as such should be used sparingly. !importanting whole selectors would caricature that idea.
If you need to trump other styles, use CSS specificity to your advantage. You can use, e.g., these techniques to push your style declarations to the top:
double class name will trump single class name:
.custom-selector.custom-selector > .custom-selector
ID trumps class:
#custom-id > .custom-class
IDs can be duplicated, too:
#id#id > #id
inline styles trump any stylesheets:
<style>
p#id#id.class.class { color: green; }
</style>
<p id="id" class="class" style="color:red">I am red!</p>
First off !important applies to one specific declaration in a CSS rule. It doesn't apply to a class. So, "no" you can't make a class !important.
Second off, !important is just one part of CSS specificity. You can also use other ways to make a rule be a more specific rule to have precedence (such as referring to an id in the parent chain instead of just the class. When I'm writing CSS, using !important is my last possible choice - I'd much rather solve overrides with other specificity solutions. Usually, if you control all the CSS, this is pretty easy to avoid using !important. If you have to override some CSS that you don't control, then sometimes it is handy.
Check this question here for more details. As it explains things better.
Let's take these three selectors, sorted from the highest specificity to the lowest:
.special-section p { }
.weird-font { }
p { }
Many CSS gurus recommend against nesting like in the first selector .special-section p, because its specificity is high enough that you can't override it with a simple class like .weird-font. I would like to find a way to still achieve nesting like in .special-section p, but without increasing specificity. Something like this:
.weird-font { }
.special-section p /* with hack to decrease specificity */ { }
p { }
Use case:
It's pretty safe to apply defaults for typography and such document-wide using simple selectors like p. However, I would like to change those defaults for a particular section, similar to .special-section p, without having to use hacks to increase the specificity of selectors like .weird-font. I would rather use a hack to decrease the specificity of .special-section p than use a hack to increase the specificity of .weird-font. Is there a way to do this?
You can't decrease the specificity, but you can add an even more specific selector for the exception.
.weird-font, /* Normal weird font */
.special-section p.weird-font /* Override for special section */
{ }
But as you can see, it's a sliding scale. So those gurus are probably right. If you would remove .special-section p, and instead give those P's their own selector .special-section-para or something, then you won't have this problem.
But personally, I don't mind having to add an exception like the one above now and then. I think the whole specifity thing is there for that purpose, and if you need a more specific selector to style something, to me that seems the right thing to do.
A commonly heard solution is to use !important. The problem with !important is that there is only one level of override. If you make a more specific selector, you can override it again with a still even more specific selector. After using !important, you're out of options. More importantly, using !important may interfere with special style sheets that a user may have for increased readability. For that reason I never use !important in a situation like this.
But then again, I don't consider myself a CSS guru. ;)
These days, in 2018, this is getting close to possible.
First of all, CSS4 will have a way that allows you to create more specific selectors without increasing specificity:
:where(.special-section) p {
color: red;
}
This will set the paragraph color inside .special-section to red, but with a specificity of 001 (i.e. the same specificity that a plain p selector would have).
The spec still calls this special pseudo-class :something(), but chances are it's going to be called :where(). (Side note: I really want this to be known as the "honey badger selector").
But that's still in the future.
However, there is actually a way to achieve this today, if you don't have to support IE anymore (or are happy with less-than-perfect fallbacks), and that is by using custom properties a.k.a. CSS variables.
So you want this:
.special-section p { color: red; }
.weird-font { color: magenta; }
p { color: green; }
but with the first part having a specificity that's lower than any selector with a class in it. You can do it like this:
.special-section p { --low-specificity-color: red; }
.weird-font { color: magenta; }
p { color: var(--low-specificity-color, green); }
If you run the below snippet in a modern browser, you should notice that the second paragraph is red, because it's in a special section, but the third paragraph is magenta, because it's .weird-font -- even though .weird-font has 010 specificity and .special-section p has 011.
.special-section p { --low-specificity-color: red; }
.weird-font { color: magenta; }
p { color: var(--low-specificity-color, green); }
<p>This is a paragraph.</p>
<section class="special-section">
<p>This is a paragraph inside a special section.</p>
<p class="weird-font">This is a paragraph with a weird font inside a special section.</p>
</section>
<p class="weird-font">This is a paragraph with a weird font.</p>
<div class="weird-font">This is a div with a weird font.</div>
This works because while the --low-specificity-color is changed with 011 specificity, it is only applied with a 001 specificity.
As a CSS guru, I bemoan the idea of throwing out everything Selectors has to offer just to avoid specificity issues. That's not to say I don't believe the specificity mechanic is flawed, but surely there are less dramatic workarounds for it.
First off: no, you can't decrease the specificity of a selector. Selectors doesn't provide any features with negative specificity levels that would decrease specificity in such a manner. The lowest you can go is *, which has zero specificity (i.e. it does not make a complex selector any more or less specific).
So your only recourse on the selector level is to increase it. Whether you can do this without using hacks depends on your definition of "hack".
The following is what I would consider a hack, because it makes use of a syntactically legal but semantically nonsensical selector like :not(_) that has no obvious purpose but to add a type selector's worth of specificity to a complex selector (which is far from obvious especially to the uninitiated):
.special-section p { }
.weird-font, :not(_).weird-font { }
The following is not what I would consider a hack, because it's something you would do normally anyway. Pretty much the only "issue" with it is that it's an apparent repetition of the lone class selector:
.special-section p { }
.weird-font, .special-section p.weird-font { }
If you consider any sort of extraneous selector for the sake of increasing specificity a hack — which is a perfectly reasonable POV, make no mistake — then the next best thing that isn't a hack is !important.
Personally, I would choose a specificity hack. !important has, ahem, important repercussions that don't come with a specificity hack — remember that !important and specificity have different semantics. For example, you cannot override an !important declaration with an inline style or JavaScript unless they are marked important as well.1
1 In fact, this was my response to Lea Verou when she had a discussion on Twitter some time ago regarding specificity hacks versus !important.
I like to be as specific as is currently necessary. I do like to leave room for future CSS changes, so don't go as specific as possible for the sake of it, such as:
.great-grandfather .grandfather .father .child { }
I will if I have to of course. But taking the example above, if I wanted to override the .child for a particular element that uses this class which has styling which might be like this:
.child {
color: black;
}
I'd go one parent above to override it, if possible:
.father .child {
color: white;
}
Further down the line, if an element on a particular page uses the .child class and in this case I need to override both the .father .child, I'll go one more level of specificity:
.grandfather .father .child {
color: red;
}
Doing it this ensures you don't need to use !important... Which I avoid like the plague as much as possible!
In my CSS, I have this:
b {
color: Red;
}
And in my body:
<b>Hello world!</b>
As a result, I get "Hello world!" text that is red in color.
However, as I add more classes:
.myClass {
color: Blue;
}
.green {
color: Green;
}
And I modify my body:
<b>H<a class="myClass">ell</a><a class="green">o</a> wo<a style="color: Black;">rl</a>d
I will not get the same result as earlier.
Is there a way to strictly set a CSS style? Which means that with the above code I wish to get "Hello world!" text that is red.
Thanks
This is a question of CSS Specificicty
The concept: Specificity is the means by which a browser decides which
property values are the most relevant to an element and gets to be
applied. Specificity is only based on the matching rules which are
composed of selectors of different sorts.
Inline styles override external CSS, and class selectors override element level selectors.
The following list of selectors is by increasing specificity:
Universal selectors
Type selectors <--- your b CSS
Class selectors <---- your .xyz CSS
Attributes selectors
Pseudo-classes
ID selectors
Inline style <--- your style=''
If you wish to override specificity, you can use !important after the rule in question, e.g.:
b {
color: Red !important;
}
However, this is not recommended, instead you should write 'better' rules (more specific) to target your HTML as appropriate. This ensures you end up with better structured code, the issue with !important being it can lead to unforeseen circumstances where rules aren't working because you may have forgot you had previously overridden them.
Again, from MDN:
The !important exception
When an !important rule is used on a style declaration, this
declaration overrides any other declaration made in the CSS, wherever
it is in the declaration list. Although, !important has nothing to do
with specificity. Using !important is bad practice because it makes
debugging hard since you break the natural cascading in your
stylesheets.
Some rules of thumb
Never use !important on site-wide css. Only use !important on
page-specific css that overrides site-wide or foreign css (from ExtJs
or YUI for example). Never use !important when you're writing a
plugin/mashup. Always look for a way to use specificity before even
considering !important
With the markup that you provided, no. Otherwise, maybe
The inline style has priority over the stylesheet so part of the text will be black no matter what. You might be able to create a rule that has enough specificity that it will take precendence over any other rules.
b, b .myClass, b .green {
color: red;
}
Though this can get troublesome to maintain. And there is still a chance that a different css rule will get higher precedence later on. I am not completely sure that even specifying all the children with * will do it.
You seem to be asking whether you can set a property (color in the example) on an element in a manner that will not be overridden by settings on inner elements.
You cannot do that with settings on the element itself. But you can set a property on an element and all of its descendants:
b, b * {
color: Red !important;
}
This will override any normal settings for color on inner elements. But it is ineffective against, say, .green { color: Green !important; }. To defeat that, you would need a more specific selector, such as b .green, for your rule—so there is no general way to achieve that (i.e., a way that is independent of the specific markup used inside the element).
in my html I have
<div id="mainNewsBody" class="news">
<a class="readMore" href="/News/Details/1">read more ...</a>
</div>
I tried to style read more ... snipper with this css
#mainNewsBody .news .readMore a{
color: #7F0609;
}
to actually apply this style I have to use !important keyword in color property.
I know that this !important keyword force to use that property but I do not understand why that is the case here, because I explicitly told to match on particular id with particular class element and inside that element to mach link.
Can someone englight me.
Thanks
Try this one:
.news .readMore {
color: #7F0609;
}
There's no need to call for id and class name for the same element.
It's a.readMore instead of .readMore a (the first case would search for an element with class .readMore and append the CSS to any children a-elements)
and #mainNewsBody .news should be #mainNewsBody.news (you should 'concatenate' the id and class since they refer to the same element)
making a total of #mainNewsBody.news a.readMore
Fiddle
EDIT
I see many notes on simplifying your css to just classes. This really depends on what you're trying to accomplish. If you're working with a huge CSS file, I'd recommend specifying as strict as possible. This to prevent any CSS being applied on places where you don't want it to.
a { } for example will mess with all your links, a.news { } will only mess with a class='news'
It'd the specificity which is troubling you, the more elements class id you have in your selector, more specific your selector is.
So for example
.class a {
}
is more specific than just
a {
}
Just see to it that you do not have a more specific selector, if you've than you need to make the current one more specific or use !important declaration as you stated.
In the above snippet this is incorrect
#mainNewsBody .news .readMore a
It will search for an element having class news inside an element having an id mainNewsBody which is not true in your case so either use this
#mainNewsBody a.readMore {
/* This will be more specific than the below one
as you are using id here and not class */
color: #7F0609;
}
Or use
.news a.readMore {
color: #7F0609;
}
Ozan is right, remove the "mainNewsBody" ID from the CSS if it's not absolutely necessary.
.news .readMore a{
color: #7F0609;}
If you want to be really specific and need to include the ID in the CSS selector remove the space from in-front of ".news"
#mainNewsBody.news .readMore a{
color: #7F0609;}
CSS Tricks - Multiple Class ID Selectors
CSS rules marked !important take precedence over later rules. !important ensures that this rule has precedence.
Probably your code is generating inline css for the a element, or you have another less specific definition for a element with !important keyword somewhere else.
Inline styles have priority higher than styles defined outside the element. To overcome the inline style or a style with !important keyword by a less specific definition, you need to define it by the keyword !important and a more specific definition.
Say I have a div that uses two css classes that both use text-align, but one is centered and the other is right aligned.
Is it possible to specify something that will give one class priority over the other?
specify a more specific selector, eg prefix an ID before it or prefix the nodename before the class
assign it after the other class
if two classes are in separate files, import the priority file second
!important
!important is the lazy way, but you really should go for #1 to avoid important-ception. Once you've added one !important you can't use it to make some other rule even more important.
If you want to be explicit about it, you can specify how the combination of those two classes work together, by supplying a rule for elements that contain both classes. For instance, you can explicitly give something with both classes foo and bar the same styling as just bar as follows. This works because .foo.bar is more specific than just .foo for elements which have both classes, and thus this rule will take precedence over the .foo rule.
.foo { text-align: center }
.bar, .foo.bar { text-align: right }
If you don't want to be this explicit, you could just place the rule for bar after the rule for foo, as given selectors of the same specificity, later rules take precedence over earlier ones:
.foo { text-align: center }
.bar { text-align: right }
You can learn more about how precedence between rules is determined in the CSS specification chapter about the cascade; that's the "C" of CSS, and is important to understand well in order to take full advantage of CSS.
You should use CSS specificity to override previous declarations
http://htmldog.com/guides/cssadvanced/specificity/
p = 1 point
.column = 10 points
#wrap = 100 points
So:
p.column { text-align: right; }
can be overwritten by:
body p.column { text-align: left; }
as “meder omuraliev” has answered, you may use a more specified selector. and I would like to provider a general way that how to sepcific a higher priority for any type of selector, that is use the attr presdeo.
for example:
html body .foo { font-family: Arial !important;}
html body .bar[attr]{ font-family: Arial !important;}
to override this you may use like this:
html body .foo:not([NONE_EXISTS_ATTR]){ font-family: Consolas !important;}
html body .bar[attr]:not([NONE_EXISTS_ATTR]){ font-family: Consolas !important;}
To add to the other answers, you don't need to add selectors not related to what you originally wanted to increase specificity, the same can be achieved by repeating the same selector multiple times:
.foo.foo takes precedence over .foo, and .foo.foo.foo takes precedence over the previous ones.
This is better than adding non-related selectors, because you only select what you really want to select. Otherwise you might get unexpected behaviour when unrelated stuff you added changes.
.bar { text-align: right !important;}
use !important
Example :
p {
background-color: red !important;
}