let me start with thanking you for taking the time to look into this and 
respond so quickly. This is much appreciated. This post arrived here 
after midnight by which time I was sound asleep. I only got to look at 
it this morning.

On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 12:39 am, Andreas L Delmelle wrote:
> On Sep 24, 2005, at 17:39, Manuel Mall wrote:
> > On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 11:27 pm, Andreas L Delmelle wrote:
> >> Anyway, the full description would be:
> >> The alignment-baseline on the first inline is aligned with the
> >> before-edge baseline of the outer block. Now, IIC, this has an
> >> impact on its own after-edge baseline, which is then in its turn
> >> the basis for the alignment-baseline of the innermost inline (?)
> >
> > You are right - this is exactly the question: Does it have an
> > impact on its after-edge baseline or not? Intuitively I would say
> > YES but the spec says NO the baseline table is not recalculated
> > (rescaled) when the font-size changes.
> I think I got it. Correct me if I'm wrong...
> The description in the Rec applies to cases where only the font-size
> changes, and all the alignment-related properties have a value of
> "auto"...
> > The baseline-table seems to only be recalculated on
> > a baseline-shift but not otherwise.
> ... but the baseline-shift value for the first inline is non-zero
> (value "baseline" is not equal to value "0"), so the Rec says in
> 7.13.3:

I think that is the core point. IMO the baseline-shift for the first 
inline is 0. Yes, there is a change of alignment-baseline but NO shift 
of any baseline. As you pointed out before vertical-align="top" is 
equivalent to:
And 7.13.3. says for baseline-shift="baseline": There is no 
baseline-shift; the dominant baseline remains in its original position.

So neither changing the font-size nor changing the vertical-align to 
"top" or "bottom" involves a baseline-shift and therefore the original 
baseline-table stays in place.

> "When the value of 'baseline-shift' is other than '0', then the
> baseline-table font-size component of the 'dominant-baseline'
> property is re-computed to use the 'font-size' applicable to the
> formatting object on which the non-zero 'baseline-shift' property is
> specified."
> So, the dominant-baseline *is* re-computed for the first inline it
> seems, although this isn't apparent if you look only at the
> description for the "baseline" value:
> "There is no baseline shift; the dominant-baseline remains in its
> original position."
> Easy to get confused by this, but still, I think your original a)
> applies here.
> Problem solved? :-)

I still think according to the spec its b). :-)

> Cheers,
> Andreas


Reply via email to