I found this in the manual: Because you are adding header elements in *fbx_settings.a4d*, they are added from the
most generic to the most specific as Fusebox traverses from the root circuit to the target circuit. That seems to tell me that the fbx_settings are added starting at the root (the most generic) to the a target circuit (the most specific). But the output is reversed: the most specific is first... Hmm. On Jan 9, 2008 2:25 PM, Michael Check <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We have a complex fusebox app to which we're trying to change the > appearance > of several embedded pages. For instance, a welcome page displays content > at > 100% while a related page shows the content at 70% width. > What I'd like to do is replace the CSS selectors specs to display the > content as a computed style. But the way to do that is to add a style > sheet > that replaces the selectors _after_ the default file of styles. > > Since this is a fusebox app, I can add the correct style.css to replace > the > selectors in the circuit needed, but fusebox.head.write has them in (what > I > would assume to be) reverse order. The circuit css file link is first, > while the root circuit is last. > > Examing the fusebox diagram process, I would have thought each > fbx_settings.a4d file is additive (FIFO?). > > Is there a way to have the css files load in the order of hierarchical > circuits? Or am I approaching this issue incorrectly? > > Thanks, > > Michael Check > _______________________________________________ > Active4D-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.aparajitaworld.com/mailman/listinfo/active4d-dev > Archives: http://mailman.aparajitaworld.com/archive/active4d-dev/ > -- Thanks, Michael Check _______________________________________________ Active4D-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.aparajitaworld.com/mailman/listinfo/active4d-dev Archives: http://mailman.aparajitaworld.com/archive/active4d-dev/
