W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > November 2009

Re: [CSS21] text-decoration/visibility

From: Řyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:13:00 +0100
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.u3anjyysru61ud@oyvinds-desktop>
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:38:18 +0100, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>  

> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Řyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>  
> wrote:

>> - It doesn't say that the decorations are propagated when specified on  
>> an
>> inline (unless I'm misunderstanding the meaning of "box generated by  
>> that
>> element" and/or "text of an element")
> They shouldn't be propagated (in fact, there's a note that doing so is
> a mistake), but they should still be applied to the entire inline,
> descendants and all.

Right, I meant the cases without floats etc., such as an otherwise-unstyled
<span style="text-decoration:underline">A<span>B</span></span>
where I assume (haven't found anything explicit in the spec) that the  
first span generates a single inline box that contains A but not B's box.  
For "other elements" there's wording about an anonymous inline box, but  
not for "inline element"s (whatever that means; display:inline?).

>> - It's not very obvious that visibility:hidden on an element  
>> (apparently)
>> applies to decorations specified on that element (making them invisible,
>> also when propagating) but not to propagated decorations specified on an
>> ancestor
> Yeah, that's not clear.  I'm not sure where that's being gotten from.
>> - As for decoration specified on a given element being ignored if the  
>> same
>> type (e.g. underline, line-through) is propagated from an ancestor, is  
>> that
>> what "cannot have any effect on the decoration of the ancestor" is  
>> meant to
>> say? If so, maybe it would be clearer if, say, "of" were to be replaced  
>> with
>> "propagated from".
> Hmm, I assumed the reverse - that it simply wouldn't reach up and
> change the ancestor's decoration.  But your reading makes more sense.

I always read it that way too when skimming this section in the past, but  
yes, it didn't make much sense.

Řyvind Stenhaug
Core Norway, Opera Software ASA
Received on Thursday, 12 November 2009 18:13:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 February 2015 12:34:31 UTC