- From: Glenn A. Adams <gadams@xfsi.com>
- Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2008 13:16:07 +0800
- To: Public TTWG List <public-tt@w3.org>
OK, we can clean up or augment this language a bit to make more clear. I introduced LEFT-PRECEDENCE as a didactic device in this case (not coming from spec) in order to show order of application. On 12/7/08 8:42 PM, "Sean Hayes" <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com> wrote: > Well as you once said, understanding a spec is the art of reading carefully > <grin/>. However notwithstanding that, I believe we should try and make things > as clear as possible. My argument is not with the algorithm, which I think we > both agree on, but the manner in which it is expressed. > > I note also in 8.4.1 it defines inline as "direct specification of an > attribute from the TT Style Namespace or TT Style Extension Namespace on the > affected element". > Which, since the intro to 8.4 is defining association to content matter, I > would take to mean that style attributes on style elements are not 'inline', > and this rule is not applicable in the manner you state. > > Also, where does LEFT-PRECEDENCE come from? I don't see how that is related > to: > " If the same style property is specified in more than one referenced > specification, then the last referenced style specification applies, where the > order of application starts from the affected element and proceeds to > referenced style specifications, and, in turn, to subsequent referenced style > specifications."; > > My reading of this phrase would be a RIGHT-PRECEDENCE operator, wherein lies > my issue. I believe that defining referential style application in terms of a > tree walk is a clearer exposition. > > Sean Hayes > Media Accessibility Strategist > Accessibility Business Unit > Microsoft > > Office: +44 118 909 5867, > Mobile: +44 7875 091385 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Glenn A. Adams [mailto:gadams@xfsi.com] > Sent: 07 December 2008 00:52 > To: Sean Hayes; Public TTWG List > Subject: Re: Specification problem - referential style chaining. > > Ah, I misunderstood you. In any case, let's decode your example a bit more > carefully: > >>> <style id="s1" tts:color="brown" /> >>> <style id="s2" style="s1" tts:color="black"/> >>> <style id="s3" style="s2" /> > > s1 is easy, and it means: > > s1 -> { <tts:color,brown> } > > s2 on the other hand, is derived as follows: > > s2 -> LEFT-PRECENDENCE < { <tts:color,black> }, s1 > > -> LEFT-PRECENDENCE < { <tts:color,black> }, { <tts:color,brown> } > > -> { tts:color,black } > > [N.B. Section 8.4.1 says "Style properties associated by inline styling are > afforded a higher priority than all other forms of style association.", so > that in resolving s2, the inline style tts:color has precedence over > referential styling style="s1".] > > s3 -> s2 > -> { tts:color,black } > > We get black, and not brown. So perhaps there is no problem here. > > G. > > On 12/7/08 7:19 AM, "Sean Hayes" <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com> wrote: > >> I wasn't talking about lexical order of elements, but of chains with multiple >> links. In a single chain the last referenced style would be the most distant >> from the affected element; which is wrong. >> >> Sean Hayes >> Media Accessibility Strategist >> Accessibility Business Unit >> Microsoft >> >> Office: +44 118 909 5867, >> Mobile: +44 7875 091385 >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Glenn A. Adams [mailto:gadams@xfsi.com] >> Sent: 06 December 2008 22:49 >> To: Sean Hayes; Public TTWG List >> Subject: Re: Specification problem - referential style chaining. >> >> I disagree. The lexical order of the style element in the document should >> have no affect on the order of style resolution in the case of multiple >> style chains. The reason for this is that these style specification chains >> are semantically ordered via id references, and not lexically ordered >> (according to appearance in document order). >> >> It would also be more difficult for a processor to resolve styles using a >> combination of style id references and the order of appearance of the >> defining element. >> >> The spec should not be changed. >> >> Glenn >> >> >> On 12/6/08 10:01 PM, "Sean Hayes" <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> The spec currently says: >>> >>> " If the same style property is specified in more than one referenced >>> specification, then the last referenced style specification applies, where >>> the >>> order of application starts from the affected element and proceeds to >>> referenced style specifications, and, in turn, to subsequent referenced >>> style >>> specifications." >>> >>> I don't think this is clear enough on how referential styling is supposed to >>> work.I think it works for cases such as the following: >>> >>> <style id="s1" tts:color="brown" /> >>> <style id="s2" tts:color="black"/> >>> <style id="s3" style="s1 s2" /> >>> >>> An element referencing s3, would have color black. >>> >>> But in this case: >>> <style id="s1" tts:color="brown" /> >>> <style id="s2" style="s1" tts:color="black"/> >>> <style id="s3" style="s2" /> >>> >>> The 'last' referenced style here is s1, and thus an element referencing s3, >>> would have color brown. >>> >>> This is not my understanding of how it is supposed to work, which is that >>> the >>> order is a linearization of the tree in a depth first pre-order. Such that >>> the >>> 'last' element is black in both cases. >>> >>> To clarify this I suggest we edit the last sentence to: >>> >>> where the order of application is a depth first pre-order tree walk starting >>> from the affected element including referenced style specifications, and all >>> subsequent referenced style specifications." >>> >>> Example: >>> >>> <style id="s1" tts:color="brown" /> >>> <style id="s2" style="s1" tts:color="black"/> >>> <style id="s3" tts:color="green" /> >>> <style id="s4" style="s3" tts:color="yellow"/> >>> <style id="s5" style="s4 s2" tts:color="pink" /> >>> >>> <p style="s5" tts:color="red">...</p> >>> >>> The depth first pre order for color here would be: >>> green, yellow, brown, black, pink, red. >>> >>> The last and therefore applied color being red. >>> >>> >>> Sean Hayes >>> Media Accessibility Strategist >>> Accessibility Business Unit >>> Microsoft >>> >>> Office: +44 118 909 5867, >>> Mobile: +44 7875 091385 >>> >>> >> >> > >
Received on Monday, 8 December 2008 05:16:59 UTC