I might be wrong but I thought it was so you could apply all common
styles to the a and then simplify :link, :hover etc. to red etc.
ie:
a{
font-family:Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: .9em;
font-weight: bold;
text-decoration: underline;
color: black;
}
a:link{
color: blue;
}
a:visited{
color:#999999;
}
a:hover{
color: red;
text-decoration: none;
}
a:active{
color: red;
text-decoration: none;
}
or have i missed the point?
Cheers
Pete
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:52:39 -0000, Kornel Lesinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Why using a:link ?
> > <a> </a> means that the word inside is a link
> > a { color:blue; text-decoration:underline; }
> > is the same as setting
> > a:link { color:blue; text-decoration:underline; }
> > Link is a redundant tag
>
> No, it isn't. Think about these:
>
> <a onclick="">foo</a>
> <a href="">bar</a>
>
> a {} matches both, and :link matches only the second one.
> Additionally :link matches only unvisited, inavctive, nonfocused links,
> but a{} sets all at once.
>
> :link will become very important in XHTML2 where
> every element can have href attribute.
>
> --
> regards, Kornel LesiÅski
>
>
>
> ******************************************************
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
>
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> ******************************************************
>
>
--
--
Peter Costello
www.domestik.net
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
