On Mar 30, 11:55 am, Molly Mockford <nospamnob...@mollymockford.me.uk>
wrote:
> At 11:27:16 on Sat, 29 Mar 2008, Ed Jay <ed...@aes-intl.com> wrote in
> <gf2tu3le195mqu0l9ih375mti3sip5p...@4ax.com>:
>
> >Beauregard T. Shagnasty scribed:
>
> >>Ed Jay wrote:
>
> >>> a.nav4w:link {color:#f8fafc;}
> >>> a.nav4w:hover {color:#330099;background-color:#f8fafc;}
> >>> a.nav4w:visited {color:#ffff00;} /*background-color:#3c93db;*/
> >>> a.nav4w:active {color:#ffffff;}
> >>You have the order wrong above. Needs to be:
> >>link, visited, (focus,) hover, active
>
> >Thank you...
>
> A useful mnemonic to use in the future is Little Virgins Have Arses.
> (For a while I tried suggesting Little Virgins Have Arms, but the former
> proved the more memorable ... for some strange reason...!)

A better solution yet would be to explain the actual CSS rules
priority for links so to use either preferred way out of many to keep
the right priority. Otherwise all these "right orders" and "little
virgins" brings way too much of voodooism into styling. Just like
someone would making "Be Red" and "Rise Blue" slogans to memorize the
div order below for a particular color instead of understanding the
CSS rule override mechanics :-)
div {
color: blue;
}
div {
color: red;
}

The topic in question was once explained in details at
http://groups.google.com/group/comp....063946e8b87860