- From: Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>
- Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 18:49:31 -0600
- To: Michael A Dolan <mdolan@newtbt.com>
- Cc: public-tt <public-tt@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CACQ=j+fQ9ETOwULt-e2xcOG3Evjso+zB1C1-41FATNZWwLkeLw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Michael A Dolan <mdolan@newtbt.com> wrote: > The prose for this attribute is not clear whether combinations of the > pairs of attributes can be used. The examples show only a single value at > a time – e.g. either underline or lineThrough.**** > > ** ** > > The syntax is constructed in an unusual manner if the intent was to only > permit a single value. The schema is currently an enumeration, forcing > only a single value. > To understand the notation, you have to trace back to XSL-FO and thence to CSS 2. See [1]. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/about.html#value-defs Specifically: A double bar (||) separates two or more options: one or more of them must occur, in any order. This would probably be more clear if someone hadn't removed the references to the XSL-FO definitions upon which the properties were based, though you can still trace it via Appendix J.2 Attribute Derivation [2]. [2] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/ttml/raw-file/default/ttml10/spec/ttaf1-dfxp.html#attribute-vocab-derivation-table In any case, the intent is *not* to permit a single value, e.g., "underline overline noLineThrough" is a valid value. **** > > ** ** > > If the schema is correct, then one can never apply both underline and > lineThrough concurrently – e.g. textDecoration=”underline lineThrough”.*** > * > > ** ** > > Does the schema reflect the intent? If so, then why the odd construction > of the syntax in the prose?**** > > ** ** > > Thanks,**** > > ** ** > > Mike**** > > ** ** > > Michael A DOLAN**** > > Television Broadcast Technology, Inc**** > > PO Box 190, Del Mar, CA 92014 USA**** > > +1-858-882-7497 (m)**** > > ** ** >
Received on Monday, 13 May 2013 00:50:41 UTC