On 23/09/2009, at 8:18 PM, Vincent Hennebert wrote:
Hi Tony,
Tony Graham wrote:
On Mon, Sep 21 2009 23:30:17 +0100, jonathan.levin...@intersystems.com
wrote:
...
If inherit is allowed to be a value then the grammar truly becomes
ambiguous
since each of these can have the value inherit and
Hi Tony,
Tony Graham wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21 2009 23:30:17 +0100, jonathan.levin...@intersystems.com wrote:
> ...
>> If inherit is allowed to be a value then the grammar truly becomes ambiguous
>> since each of these can have the value inherit and we don?t know which ones
>> are
>> omitted and mu
On Mon, Sep 21 2009 23:30:17 +0100, jonathan.levin...@intersystems.com wrote:
...
> If inherit is allowed to be a value then the grammar truly becomes ambiguous
> since each of these can have the value inherit and we don?t know which ones
> are
> omitted and must take the value normal.
'inherit'
Hi Jonathan,
Jonathan Levinson wrote:
> Hi Vincent,
>
> You make excellent points, however for font-style, font-variant and
> font-weight the initial value (the default value) is normal, not inherit.
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xsl-20011015/slice7.html#font-style
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR
On 23/09/2009, at 12:13 AM, Jonathan Levinson wrote:
Hi Vincent,
You make excellent points, however for font-style, font-variant and
font-weight the initial value (the default value) is normal, not
inherit.
http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xsl-20011015/slice7.html#font-style
http://www.w3.
Message-
From: Vincent Hennebert [mailto:vhenneb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 7:20 AM
To: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Subject: Re: ambiguity of grammar for font shorthand?
Hi Jonathan,
Jonathan Levinson wrote:
> Hi Vincent,
>
>
>
> As I read the gramm
Hi Jonathan,
Jonathan Levinson wrote:
> Hi Vincent,
>
>
>
> As I read the grammar for the font shorthand it is ambiguous, though not
> fatally so as long as one excludes the value of "inherit" from
> individual properties in the font short hand.
>
>
>
> For instance the first optional arg
Hi,
> I think it is probably the case that in the context of the font short
> hand – the font properties cannot take the value of inherit, since
> this renders the grammar irreducibly ambiguous. While such an
> exclusion is not mentioned in the spec, it makes sense that inherit
> must be exclude
Hi,
> Also, in your message you said we could ignore a value for font of
> caption, icon, etc., as the standard tells us to do, but the standard
> discusses these values and their relation to system fonts. Was this
> an oversight on your part or am I mis-reading the spec? [1]
>
> [1] http://www.w
