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

Re: [CSS21] text-decoration/visibility

From: Řyvind Stenhaug <oyvinds@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 16:40:10 +0100
To: "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.u3ca480oru61ud@oyvinds-desktop>
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:16:25 +0100, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:

> On 11/12/09 12:38 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>> - 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.
> The "wouldn't reach up" is correct.  That is, the ancestor draws the  
> decorations no matter what.  The child can draw its own decorations, but  
> can't make the ancestor's go away.

I somehow mistakenly got the impression that the implementations did  
something else (regarding the child drawing its own). But still, I assume  
this is specifically about decoration drawn across/along the child  
element's boxes because of a rule on the parent element. I.e. things like  
B still getting an underline here:
<span style="text-decoration:underline">A<span  
With the current wording it might as well sound like it's about the  
underline under the As, which is just confusing.

Řyvind Stenhaug
Core Norway, Opera Software ASA
Received on Friday, 13 November 2009 15:41:05 UTC

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