On Sunday 07 January 2007 23:04, J.Pietschmann wrote:
> Manuel Mall wrote:
> > I was just looking at some inline handling stuff and came across
> > the inheritance behaviour of the text-decoration property.
>
> IIRC one of the problems is merging the various decoration values:
>   <fo:wrapper text-decoration="underline">text1
>    <fo:wrapper text-decoration="overline">text2
>    </fo:wrapper>
>   </fo:wrapper>
> I'd say "text 2" should be both underlined and overlined. I
> text-decoration were inherited, the decoration of the inner
> wrapper would already override underlining.
> In order to turn off underlining, one should use
>   <fo:wrapper text-decoration="underline">text1
>    <fo:wrapper text-decoration="overline no-underline">text2
>    </fo:wrapper>
>   </fo:wrapper>
>
Joerg,

that makes sense to me. It seems the spec is once again confusingly 
worded. What you are saying is that the intention of the spec is to 
treat the text-decoration property actually as 4 separate inheritable 
properties like:

text-decoration-underline:
        Value: false | true | inherit
        Initial: false
        Inherited: yes

text-decoration-overline: ...
text-decoration-line-through: ...
text-decoration-blink: ...

Actually as color is inherited as well the properties are more like:

text-decoration-underline-style:
        Value: none | solid | inherit
        Initial: none
        Inherited: yes

text-decoration-underline-color:
        Value: auto
        Initial: auto
        Inherited: yes

With the prose then explaining that auto means the font color of the 
element the corresponding text-decoration-...-style property is 
explicit set on.

The current text-decoration property then just becomes a shorthand for 
the above.

If this interpretation of the spec intention is correct then FOP behaves 
OK.

> J.Pietschmann

Manuel

Reply via email to