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
