I can -- was more of a "for purity's sake" / DRY question -- and to maybe draw out a technique that I missed in the docs.
Thanks for the great work! -c On May 22, 10:12 pm, Nathan Weizenbaum <[email protected]> wrote: > Why don't you define the background property after you include the mixin, so > the mixin's definition will be overridden? > > > > On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Chris G <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all, quick q, > > > I'm using a mixin that defines many properties, including a background > > image. > > > That background image is overriding a more desirable background > > definition in an earlier/higher css rule. > > > I'd like to use everything from the mixin but that background > > property. > > > Is something like an "undefine: background" possible, so that a lower- > > priority background property can come through? Or any available > > technique. > > > Barring that, am going to parameterize the mixin with a default > > variable for background. > > > Great thanks, > > > Chris > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Haml" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected] <haml%[email protected]>. > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Haml" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haml" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en.
