CSS for td in table using a wildcard - css

I'm having some trouble with some CSS. I have a number of unique tables with a similar format name, and I need to set the background color on some of them. However, if I try and use a wildcard the style gets overwritten by a parent CSS file.
The background colour here works fine:
#AllProtectedServers1 td.status.online{
color: green;
background-color: yellow;
font-weight: bold;
}
But the background colour doesn't work here as it's being overwritten higher up (although everything else does):
td.status.online {
color: green;
background-color: yellow;
font-weight: bold;
}
I'm going to have 20+ tables all starting with "AllProtectedServers", so naming them all individually is going to make the css huge. Is there anyway I could use a wildcard? I've tried using div[id^='id_'] and similar selectors without any luck.
Anyone have any ideas of what I could use instead?
Update:
Please note the ID's are unique (AllProtectedServersCompany1, AllProtectedServersCompany2, etc), but they all start with AllProtectedServers. I want to create some CSS that will override the stylesheet for the table that is overriding my changes and use a wildcard so I don't have to specify each one.

Maybe this would help:
td.status.online
{
color: green;
background-color: yellow !important;
font-weight: bold;
}

Alpipego's comment is not correct. You're perfectly fine using ID selectors (#) for CSS. These can be overwritten by other ID selectors of the same or higher specificity (depending on page order) or the !important rule.
However, you want to avoid using !important as a CSS rule because that can back you into a corner and become a maintenance nightmare.
As a matter of fact what you need to learn about is CSS Specificity. I recommend reading the CSS: Specificity Wars for an entertaining but educational overview of how CSS Specificity works.
http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/archives/css_specificity_wars.html
Smashing Magazine also published an article on it that's more extensive:
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2007/07/27/css-specificity-things-you-should-know/
You do want to be careful about not going crazy with specificity. ID's are (supposed to be) unique per page, so if you end up with a lot of deeply nested rules (#foo .bar .baz .goo), you're probably looking at needing some refactoring.
So, if you use Chrome, pop open the developer tool and look at the CSS selector and determine the specificity. All you need to do is:
a) Match the specificity but make your style come later in the DOM page order
or
b) Use a higher specificity
That's all there really is to it.
I hope that helps!
Cheers.

jmbertucci's answer is quite correct, if perhaps a little incomplete, I will expand with some examlpes.
One of the most overlooked aspects of CSS is specificity rules. As mentioned by jmbertucci please see:
http://csswizardry.com/2014/07/hacks-for-dealing-with-specificity/
http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/archives/css_specificity_wars.html
A little more googling will present a wealth of articles for you.
Let's take some base html and css and a bit of a guess as to what you have.
HTML
<table class="myTable">
<tr>
<td class="status online">Online</td>
<td class="status offline">Offline</td>
</tr>
</table>
CSS
table.myTable td.status
{
background-color:#fff;
}
td.status.online
{
background-color:#f00;
}
Fiddle
This will result in a white background for "online" as table.myTable td.status is more specific than td.status.online.
In this example we need to make the second selector more specific. As you mentioned adding an ID results in what you want as IDs have an extremely high specificity score and a very hard to over-write. So much so that some say never to use them*. A simple solution in this example is to add table to the seconde selector.
table td.status.online
{
background-color:#f00;
}
This results in a red background for "online"
Fiddle
Adding table may not work in your instance. YOu need to find the style rule that is being applied using Chrome Developer Tools or Firebug for Firefox and create a rule that is more specific.
If you provide more information I may be able to provide a more specific answer.
* A note on ID's ID's extremely high specificty is both their strenth and weakness. I believe they can be used, but with caution. If you want to style a specific part of a page in a specific manner, you may have a canditate for ID. Think along the lines of a header and footer before the days of HTML5. Another good example may be <section id="discalimer">, using an ID provies two benifits: it's an anchor for specific styling and it can be linked to, e.g: Disclaimer. A further read: http://www.zeldman.com/2012/11/21/in-defense-of-descendant-selectors-and-id-elements/
Keep in mind the arguments on weather to use IDs or not are a matter of optinion and their are good points on both sides. W3C, the standards guys, has no stance on this. If where you work has a coding guide, stick to that mandate. If you're unsure, don't use them in CSS to be safe. Most importantly keep IDs unique.

Andy68man, no wildcard needed, just use a class. Same class for all the tables if they all share the same properties. As in (first the HTML):
<table class="allProtectedServers"> ..... </table>
<table class="allProtectedServers"> ..... </table>
<table class="allProtectedServers secondClass"> ..... </table>
and the CSS:
.AllProtectedServers td.status.online { ... }
If there are one or more properties that only some of the tables have, create another class and give those particular tables both classes, as in the third line of HTML above.
Alternatively, if that still gets overruled by the CSS above, put a single div round all the tables or even the whole page (or there may already be one), give the div an id, and add that into your selector to increase it's specificty (your first bit of code above shows the extra id will be enough to overrule the other CSS that's causing your problem):
#myDiv td.status.online { ... }

Related

Is it proper syntax to "nest" id declarations inside other id declarations in CSS?

So, I'm not sure what I've stumbled upon here. I'm working with some CSS and I know it is common place to do something like this:
#content{
/* Style the content div. */
}
#content p{
/* Style all p elements in the content div. */
}
I'd like to give one specific p element a float:right style. Only one such p element will occur in the content element. Naturally, I'd just give this element an id, but then I had the idea to do it this way:
#content #right_floating_p{
float:right;
}
This works when I run the code, but I was wondering about best practice and whether or not this actually does anything scope wise. I could just as easily define a separate id for right_floating_p, but to me it feels natural that it should be defined with the content id because it will be used only on one p element inside the content element.
If anyone has any information about this syntax, please let me know. Thanks!
My recommendation is to only include the last ID. This is fairly standard separation of concerns. What if you want to change the first ID #content, but the last one #right_floating_p still makes sense and shouldn't change? There is more room for error if you specify something unnecessarily.
Other reasons this is good:
Smaller, faster (but barely) download size for your users.
More readable, in my opinion.
Faster (but barely) performance.
Over-qualifying tags is bad practice in general, as far as performance goes. Browsers read your selectors from right-to-left, by the time it interprets your #content selector, that information is pointless. My advice is to not trust that the browser will optimize for this.
Alvaro nailed it in his comment above.
The id must be unique on the page, but not necessarily across the whole site. So, for instance, if you had the #right_floating_p element on every page, but it had a #content element as an ancestor only on a certain page where you wanted it styled differently, then you'd want to use the #content #right_floating_p selector to apply the context-specific style.
I would suggest only using the most precise selector as you can, not only for readability and file size, but also for specificity.
CSS selectors have a specificity to them, so if you were to override it later (such as with a media query), the more specific selector will override the less specific one.
#content #right_floating_p {
color: red;
}
div #right_floating_p {
color: green; /* Will not apply, as it's less specific */
}
p {
color: black; /* Even less specific */
}
It will work having the first selector, but it's not necessary.

Priorizing CSS properties

I am building websites for a while, and I have a question about CSS I can't really rid over. So there is that frequent situation when multiple classes affect a DOM element, and both classes declare the same properties. For example:
.first {
color:white;
}
.second {
color:black;
}
I know that if I have an element with class="first second" in that the text will be black. If I rather want it to be white, I have several options:
Using !important: I know this one is handy and I use it, but sometimes, if I use it too often, my CSS may become messy. I mean, multiple !important's can result the same basic situation.
Reordering the classes inline: if I am correct, which class comes first, it will be the priority one. This is nice, but i often work with environments where I can't affect that. Secondly, this is not a global but a local solution.
Reorder the CSS itself: well, this sounds interesting, but if I work with many stylesheets (and I do), it is hard to track, especially when it is WIP.
Actually what I am looking for is some workaround like z-index but for priorizing which class is stronger. Because I can't really find anything useful in this topic, I am just curious maybe it is a user error, and you guys know something I don't. How do you manage this? What do you suggest?
class="first second" is the same as class="second first". The priority is based on the position of the declarations in your css and not in their position on the html element.
So, if you want priority of a class against another, put the top priority class LAST on the css file.
.first {
color:white;
}
.second {
color:black;
}
in this example, class second has always priority over class first. This happens because browser scans through the css top-to-bottom and always applying the rules of matched classes that finds. So, the last matched class has priority over the previous matched classes.
see this fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/5c29dzrr/
At the same specificity level, the CSS selector that is furthest down the stylesheet will be applied. So in your example, if you wanted in that situation to have the element with the white colour you would have to order your properties like so:
.second {
color: black;
}
.first {
color: white;
}
The order of the classes in the HTML tag is not important; it is the order in which they appear in your CSS.
The better way to handle this is to go with some better naming convention such as BEM or SMACSS so that you don't have the issue of conflicting class names.
Edit: It might be worth reading up on specificity and the cascade for a better understanding of this. I found this calculator to be pretty handy in determining which rules will take precendence, although these days you can just use the developer tools to find out that information.

Is there a way to apply a CSS class from within a style?

I'm trying to be more modular in my CSS style sheets and was wondering if there is some feature like an include or apply that allows the author to apply a set of styles dynamically.
Since I am having a hard time wording the question, perhaps an example will make more sense.
Let's say, for example, I have the following CSS:
.red {color:#e00b0b}
#footer a {font-size:0.8em}
h2 {font-size:1.4em; font-weight:bold;}
In my page, let's say that I want both the footer links and h2 elements to use the special red color (there may be other locations I would like to use it as well). Ideally, I would like to do something like the following:
.red {color:#e00b0b}
#footer a {font-size:0.8em; apply-class:".red";}
h2 {font-size:1.4em; font-weight:bold; apply-class:".red";}
To me, this feels "modular" in a way because I can make modifications to the .red class without having to worry so much about where it is used, and other locations can use the styles in that class without worrying about, specifically, what they are.
I understand that I have the following options and have included why, in my fairly inexperienced opinion, they are less-than-perfect:
Add the color property to every element I want to be that color. Not ideal because, if I change the color, I have to update every rule to match the new color.
Add the red class to every element I want to be red. Not ideal because it means that my HTML is dictating presentation.
Create an additional rule that selects every element I want to be red and apply the color property to that. Not ideal because it is harder to find all of the rules that style a specific element, making maintenance more of a challenge
Maybe I'm just being an ass and the following options are the only options and I should stick with them. I'm wondering, however, if the "ideal" (well, my ideal) method exists and, if so, what is the proper syntax?
If it doesn't exist, option 3 above seems like my best bet. However, I would like to get confirmation.
First of all you cannot do apply-class:".red";
to perform this type of action i will suggest you to use this method
.red {color:#e00b0b;}
h2 {font-size:1.4em; font-weight:bold;}
.mymargin{margin:5px;}
<h2 class="red mymargin">This is h2</h2>
and to use in div
<div id="div1" class="red mymargin"></div>
In this case if you will change in .red class.it will be changed everywhere
Short answer: There's no way to do this in pure CSS.
Longer answer: Sass solves this problem via the #extend directive.
.error {
border: 1px #f00;
background-color: #fdd;
}
.seriousError {
#extend .error;
border-width: 3px;
}
This lets you keep your CSS modular in development, though it does require a precompilation step before you use it. It works very nicely though.
You can use the DOM in javascript to edit the id and/or class attributes of HTML tags dynamically.
I agree with DarthCaesar and jhonraymos. To update a class using JavaScript, all you would need is a simple:
function toggleColorClass(e){
var redClass = document.getElementsByClassName('red');
redClass.removeAttribute('class', 'red');
/*Set the class to some other color class*/
redClass.setAttribute('class', 'blue');
}
Of course, to make this work, you would need to include the above function in your document somewhere... if this is all the JS you're using you can probably stick it in the head or even use it inline. You would probably also want to write it so that the toggle goes in both directions, i.e. turning red on and off. Furthermore, jhonray's snippet is probably how you would want to mark up your CSS.

div#name vs #name

I know that in a stylesheet div#name and #name do the same thing. Personally I've taken to using div#name for most styling I do, with the reasoning that it's slightly faster, and means that I can identify HTML elements more easily by looking at the CSS.
However all of the big websites I seem to look at use #name over div#name (stack overflow included)
In fact I'm finding it very difficult to find many websites at all that use div#name over #name
Is there some advantage to doing #name that I'm missing? Are there any reasons to use it over div#name that I don't yet know about?
Since the div part of div#name is not required (because ID are unique per page), it makes for smaller CSS files to remove it. Smaller CSS files means faster HTTP requests and page load times.
And as NickC pointed out, lack of div allows one to change the HTML tag of the element without breaking the style rule.
Since ID's have to be unique on the page, most ID's you'd run into would only ever appear once in your style sheet, so it makes sense not to bother including what element it would appear on. Excluding it also saves a few characters in your style sheet, which for large sites which get visited millions and millions of times a day, saves quite a bit of bandwidth.
There is an advantage to including the element name in the case where a division with ID "name" might appear differently than a span with ID "name" (where it would show a division on one type of page and a span on another type of page). This is pretty rare though, and I've never personally run across a site that has done this. Usually they just use different ID's for them.
It's true that including the element name is faster, but the speed difference between including it and excluding it on an ID selector is very, very small. Much smaller than the bandwidth that the site is saving by excluding it.
a matter of code maintainability and readability.
when declaring element#foo the code-style becomes rigid - if one desires to change the document's structure, or replace element types, one would have to change the stylesheets as well.
if declaring #foo we'll better conform to the 'separation of concerns' and 'KISS' principals.
another important issue is the CSS files get minified by a couple of characters, that may build up to many of characters on large stylesheets.
Since an id like #name should be unique to the page, there is no reason per se to put the element with it. However, div#name will have a higher precedence, which may (or may not) be desired. See this fiddle where the following #name does not override the css of div#name.
I would guess that including the element name in your id selector would actually be slower – browsers typically hash elements with id attributes for quicker element look up. Adding in the element name would add an extra step that could potentially slow it down.
One reason you might want to use element name with id is if you need to create a stronger selector. For example you have a base stylesheet with:
#titlebar {
background-color: #fafafa;
}
But, on a few pages, you include another stylesheet with some styles that are unique to those pages. If you wanted to override the style in the base stylesheet, you could beef up your selector:
div#titlebar {
background-color: #ffff00;
}
This selector is more specific (has a higher specificity), so it will overwrite the base style.
Another reason you would want to use element name with id would be if different pages use a different element for the same id. Eg, using a span instead of a link when there is no appropriate link:
a#productId {
color: #0000ff;
}
span#productId {
color: #cccccc;
}
Using #name only:
Well the first obvious advantage would be that a person editing the HTML (template or whatever) wouldn't break CSS without knowing it by changing an element.
With all of the new HTML5 elements, element names have become a lot more interchangeable for the purpose of semantics alone (for example, changing a <div> to be a more semantic <header> or <section>).
Using div#name:
You said "with the reasoning that it's slightly faster". Without some hard facts from the rendering engine developers themselves, I would hesitate to even make this assumption.
First of all, the engine is likely to store a hash table of elements by ID. That would mean that creating a more specific identifier is not likely to have any speed increase.
Second, and more importantly, such implementation details are going to vary browser to browser and could change at any time, so even if you had hard data, you probably shouldn't let it factor into your development.
I use the div#name because the code is more readable in the CSS file.
I also structure my CSS like this:
ul
{
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
}
ul.Home
{
padding: 10px 0;
}
ul#Nav
{
padding: 0 10px;
}
So I'm starting generic and then becoming more specific later on.
It just makes sense to me.
Linking div name: http://jsfiddle.net/wWUU7/1/
CSS:
<style>
div[name=DIVNAME]{
color:green;
cursor:default;
font-weight:bold;
}
div[name=DIVNAME]:hover{
color:blue;
cursor:default;
font-weight:bold;
}
</style>
HTML:
<div name="DIVNAME">Hover This!</div>
List of Css selectors:
http://www.w3schools.com/cssref/css_selectors.asp

CSS 'schema' how-to

How does one go about establishing a CSS 'schema', or hierarchy, of general element styles, nested element styles, and classed element styles. For a rank novice like me, the amount of information in stylesheets I view is completely overwhelming. What process does one follow in creating a well factored stylesheet or sheets, compared to inline style attributes?
I'm a big fan of naming my CSS classes by their contents or content types, for example a <ul> containing navigational "tabs" would have class="tabs". A header containing a date could be class="date" or an ordered list containing a top 10 list could have class="chart". Similarly, for IDs, one could give the page footer id="footer" or the logo of the website id="mainLogo". I find that it not only makes classes easy to remember but also encourages proper cascading of the CSS. Things like ol.chart {font-weight: bold; color: blue;} #footer ol.chart {color: green;} are quite readable and takes into account how CSS selectors gain weight by being more specific.
Proper indenting is also a great help. Your CSS is likely to grow quite a lot unless you want to refactor your HTML templates evertime you add a new section to your site or want to publish a new type of content. However hard you try you will inevitably have to add a few new rules (or exceptions) that you didn't anticipate in your original schema. Indeting will allow you to scan a large CSS file a lot quicker. My personal preference is to indent on how specific and/or nested the selector is, something like this:
ul.tabs {
list-style-type: none;
}
ul.tabs li {
float: left;
}
ul.tabs li img {
border: none;
}
That way the "parent" is always furthest to the left and so the text gets broken up into blocks by parent containers. I also like to split the stylesheet into a few sections; first comes all the selectors for HTML elements. I consider these so generic that they should come first really. Here I put "body { font-size: 77%; }" and "a { color: #FFCC00; }" etc. After that I would put selectors for the main framework parts of the page, for instance "ul#mainMenu { float: left; }" and "div#footer { height: 4em; }". Then on to common object classes, "td.price { text-align: right; }", finally followed by extra little bits like ".clear { clear: both; }". Now that's just how I like to do it - I'm sure there are better ways but it works for me.
Finally, a couple of tips:
Make best use of cascades and don't "overclass" stuff. If you give a <ul> class="textNav" then you can access its <li>s and their children without having to add any additional class assignments. ul.textNav li a:hover {}
Don't be afraid to use multiple classes on a single object. This is perfectly valid and very useful. You then have control of the CSS for groups of objects from more than one axis. Also giving the object an ID adds yet a third axis. For example:
<style>
div.box {
float: left;
border: 1px solid blue;
padding: 1em;
}
div.wide {
width: 15em;
}
div.narrow {
width: 8em;
}
div#oddOneOut {
float: right;
}
</style>
<div class="box wide">a wide box</div>
<div class="box narrow">a narrow box</div>
<div class="box wide" id="oddOneOut">an odd box</div>
Giving a class to your document <body> tag (or ID since there should only ever be one...) enables some nifty overrides for individual pages, like hilighting the menu item for the page you're currently on or getting rid of that redundant second sign-in form on the sign-in page, all using CSS only. "body.signIn div#mainMenu form.signIn { display: none; }"
I hope you find at least some of my ramblings useful and wish you the best with your projects!
There are a number of different things you can do to aid in the organisation of your CSS. For example:
Split your CSS up into multiple files. For example: have one file for layout, one for text, one for reset styles etc.
Comment your CSS code.
Why not add a table of contents?
Try using a CSS framework like 960.gs to get your started.
It's all down to personal taste really. But here are a few links that you might find useful:
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2008/08/18/7-principles-of-clean-and-optimized-css-code/
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2008/05/02/improving-code-readability-with-css-styleguides/
http://www.louddog.com/bloggity/2008/03/css-best-practices.php
http://natbat.net/2008/Sep/28/css-systems/
Think of the CSS as creating a 'toolkit' that the HTML can refer to. The following rules will help:
Make class names unambiguous. In most cases this means prefixing them in a predicatable way. For example, rather than left, use something like header_links_object2_left.
Use id rather than class only if you know there will only ever be one of an object on a page. Again, make the id unambiguous.
Consider side effects. Rules like margin and padding, float and clear, and so on can all have unexpected consequences on other elements.
If your stylesheet is to be used my several HTML coders, consider writing them a small, clear guide to how to write HTML to match your scheme. Keep it simple, or you'll bore them.
And as always, test it in multiple browsers, on multiple operating systems, on lots of different pages, and under any other unusual conditions you can think of.
Putting all of your CSS declarations in roughly the same order as they will land in the document hierarchy is generally a good thing. This makes it fairly easy for future readers to see what attributes will be inherited, since those classes will be higher up in the file.
Also, this is sort of orthogonal to your question, but if you are looking for a tool to help you read a CSS file and see how everything shakes out, I cannot recommend Firebug enough.
The best organizational advice I've ever received came from a presentation at An Event Apart.
Assuming you're keeping everything in a single stylesheet, there's basically five parts to it:
Reset rules (may be as simple as the
* {margin: 0; padding: 0} rule,
Eric Meyer's reset, or the YUI
reset)
Basic element styling; this
is the stuff like basic typography
for paragraphs, spacing for lists,
etc.
Universal classes; this section
for me generally contains things
like .error, .left (I'm only 80%
semantic), etc.
Universal
layout/IDs; #content, #header,
or whatever you've cut your page up
into.
Page-specific rules; if you
need to modify an existing style
just for one or a few pages, stick a
unique ID high up (body tag is
usually good) and toss your
overrides at the end of the document
I don't recommend using a CSS framework unless you need to mock something up in HTML fast. They're far too bloated, and I've never met one whose semantics made sense to me; it's much better practice to create your own "framework" as you figure out what code is shared by your projects over time.
Reading other people's code is a whole other issue, and with that I wish you the best of luck. There's some truly horrific CSS out there.
Cop-out line of the year: it depends.
How much do you need to be styling? Do you need to change the aspects of alomost every element, or is it only a few?
My favorite place to go for information like this is CSS Zen Garden & A List Apart.
There are two worlds:
The human editor perspective: Where CSS is most easily understand, when it has clear structure, good formatting, verbose names, structured into layout, color and typesetting...
The consumer perspective: The visitor is most happy if your site loades quickly, if it look perfect in his browser, so the css has to be small, in one file (to save further connections) and contain CSS hacks to support all browsers.
I recommend you to start with a CSS framework:
Blueprint if you like smaller things
or YAML for a big and functional one
There is also a list of CSS Frameworks...
And then bring it in shape (for the browser) with a CSS Optimizer (p.e. CSS Form.&Opti.)
You can measure the Results (unpotimized <-> optimized) with YSlow.
A few more tips for keeping organized:
Within each declaration, adopt an order of attributes that you stick to. For example, I usually list margins, padding, height, width, border, fonts, display/float/other, in that order, allowing for easier readability in my next tip
Write your CSS like you would any other code: indent! It's easy to scan a CSS file for high level elements and then drill down rather than simply going by source order of your HTML.
Semantic HTML with good class names can help a lot with remembering what styles apply to which elements.

Resources