John L. Clark wrote: > First on the agenda today is a tiny CSS nit with workaround. It would > seem that the text-decoration property does not properly display across > all boxes generated by that element. For example (in DocBook): > > <ulink url="http://www.example.org/";>Hello, world, > <emphasis>please see my homepage!</emphasis></ulink> > > the text "Hello, world, " is underlined, but that underline does not > extend to the box for the emphasis element. Note that this is not > strictly an inheritence issue; if my reading of the spec[0] is correct, > the underline should extend across all inline blocks within the ulink. > This also corresponds with what I (and perhaps others) would expect. > That being said, it can be worked around using inheritence: > > * > { > text-decoration: inherit; > } > > which is not exactly what you'd want, but which works in most > situations. You can also tune it to be arbitrarily close to your > desired display in a given context.
Excerpts of the CSS2 recommendation: --- Inherited: no (see prose) This property is not inherited, but descendant boxes of a block box should be formatted with the same decoration (e.g., they should all be underlined). The color of decorations should remain the same even if descendant elements have different 'color' values. --- Problem: we *currently* don't see how to implement this, simply and efficiently. (Turning text-decoration into an inherited property would just take one 1 minute, is simple and efficient but, does not conform to the spec). > Second up, I was wondering if there was any chance of getting > CSS-compliant procedural counters in XXE. I'd like to be able to do > arbitrary nesting, amongst other things. > > Finally, I wanted to ask for xml:base support in XXE. Of course XXE > supports adding xml:base attributes, but I would like to use them to > evaluate URIs for resources (as they are intended). For example, when > referencing graphics or document components (using XInclude), I believe > XXE should take into account the xml:base that may be in scope. xml:base attributes are taken into account when referencing document components using XInclude (this is clearly specified in the proposed W3C recommendation). If this is not the case, you have found a bug. > Also, these URIs (taken against an in-scope base URI) should be resolved using > XML catalogs. Interestingly, this raises the question of "classes" of > XML catalogs in XXE: it currently uses XML catalogs for application > processing, but this use of XML catalogs would be more along the lines > of user data resolution. I've added your 2 RFEs to the wish list ( http://www.xmlmind.com/xmleditor/wish_list.html ).
