W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xsl-editors@w3.org > July to September 2001

RE: table-cell border precedence

From: MURAKAMI Shinyu <murakami@nadita.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 03:10:43 -0400 (EDT)
To: xsl-editors@w3.org
Message-Id: <200108031610.ECC93848.NJBVNLBS@nadita.com>
Antenna House XSL Formatter V1.1 [1] supports the collapsing border 
model, which I have implemented.

But I could not agree to the XSL CR section 6.7.10, "It is an error if 
there are two such borders that have the same precedence but are not 
identitical."

Instead, the CSS2 border conflict resolution rule [2] was adopted for 
borders with same precedence specified.

In addition, I thought that border-style "none" always should have 
lowest precedence, and "hidden" always should have highest precedence. 
I believe that the former is quite right, but I am not so confident of 
the latter. 

border-style "none" with higher border-precedence specified value should 
not have higher precedence since table-cell borders (default precedence 
is "0" on fo:table-cell) should not be hidden by table's "none" borders 
(default precedence is "1" on fo:table).

border-style "hidden" should have higher precedence than other borders 
(with same border-precedence specified value).

IMHO in most cases the CSS2 border conflict resolution rule is more 
useful than the border-precedence specification.
Dear XSL authors, please reconsider this problem.

[1] http://www.antennahouse.com/xslformatter.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/tables.html#border-conflict-resolution


Shinyu Murakami
Antenna House XSL Formatter team
Received on Friday, 3 August 2001 06:58:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:52 GMT