DEV Community

Cover image for Quick CSS Quiz #4
Abdelrahman Ismail
Abdelrahman Ismail

Posted on • Updated on

Quick CSS Quiz #4

In this series, I try to focus on CSS weird parts, throw quiz and its answer, hoping to give a better understanding of how CSS works in depth.

The problem:

<div class="wrapper">
  <h1   id="header" class="is-red">Red text</h1>
  <span id="span"   class="is-blue">Blue text</span>
  <p    id="text"   class="is-green">Green text</p>
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode {
  color: red;
} {
  color: blue;
.is-green {
  color: green;

Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode

The previous code snippets, for three different HTML elements wrapped in a div .wrapper, each element has a different color as specified in the style snippet, if you added the following CSS code at the end of the stylesheet what will be the color for header, span, and paragraph elements?

.wrapper :not(#happy) {
  color: black;
Enter fullscreen mode Exit fullscreen mode


  • header is red, span is blue, and paragraph is green
  • header is red, span is blue, and paragraph is black
  • header is red, span is black, and paragraph is black
  • all elements are black

The answer:

you can find the answer below, but please give yourself a couple of minutes to think about it, to make sure you benefit from this quiz.


The correct answer is: all elements are black
If you wonder why this is the correct answer, please read the discussions below..

Top comments (8)

gmartigny profile image
Guillaume Martigny

Just to add some salt: remember that css reads from right to left. It means that the browser will parse it:

  • take element with ID "happy" (none element)
  • invert selection (all elements)
  • find which has any parent with class "wrapper"

You can see that with a large DOM it can be really expensive. If you need performance (big app with lots of animations), never use ":not".

ryan profile image

I wasn't aware of performance implications for using :not, but it makes sense now.

What if you use :not with a specific selector, is it still expensive?
For instance,
#toybox .teddy-bear:not('.blue')

I would expect this first selects all teddy bears inside the toybox, and then filters out the teddy bears that are blue. That makes sense, doesn't it?

But if it worked in reverse, looking through the entire DOM house for objects that are not blue, and then filtering for not blue objects that are teddy bears inside the toybox, it would be expensive indeed.

gmartigny profile image
Guillaume Martigny

I'm not a Chrome engineer, but there's a lot of article about rendering online.

Human read CSS form left-to-right because it makes sense in our world (I need to open the toybox first to search for teddy-bear). But browsers do the opposite.

In practice (recent browser and computer), it need a huge DOM for this to matter. Keep your CSS clarity first, then think about perfs. Again, CSS is a pain to maintain, write it as clear as possible !

ismail9k profile image
Abdelrahman Ismail • Edited

You can find this challenge very easy this time, if you know how "CSS Specificity" works, but I want to mention here that you can use :not pseudo-class with a fake id to increase selector specificity, rather than using important keyword.

Let's calculate each selector's specificity:
a- (1-1-0)
b- (0-1-1)
c- .is-green (0-0-1)

And the rule-set selector's specificity is (1-1-0), which is greater than a and b selectors and equal to c, but it comes last in the stylesheet; so its declaration will apply over the all three selectors, and all elements will have a black color.

keinchy profile image
Frederick Jaime

i really like these Quick CSS quiz, i may start adding some my self.

equiman profile image
Camilo Martinez • Edited

First time I got it! Yes!

Equiman 1 - CSS 3

ismail9k profile image
Abdelrahman Ismail

Congrats, keep moving forward πŸ€—πŸŽ‰πŸŽ‰

leenternet profile image
Lee Jordan

I got it because I understand specificity. It's a good interview brainteaser though. I might use it myself.