- From: Braden N. McDaniel <braden@shadow.net>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 20:23:51 -0700
- To: "'Simon Richter'" <geier@psi5.com>
- Cc: "'Todd Fahrner'" <fahrner@pobox.com>, <www-style@w3.org>, <www-html@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: www-style-request@w3.org [mailto:www-style-request@w3.org]On > Behalf Of Braden N. McDaniel > Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 1998 8:08 PM > To: 'Simon Richter' > Cc: 'Todd Fahrner'; www-style@w3.org; www-html@w3.org > Subject: RE: OBJECT, inheritance, and rendering > > > <OBJECT DATA="mytext.txt" TYPE="text/plain" > > > STYLE="color: red" HEIGHT="100%" WIDTH="100%">My Text > > > </OBJECT> > > > > > > Obviously the (fallback) contents of the OBJECT element > > should be rendered > > > in red. But what about the referenced text file? > > > > I think the referenced text file should be rendered in red, > > With this I agree... [shnip] > "Background" properties are clearly a bad example for the > case you're trying > to address. Can you show how the inheritance rule you > describe would be > desirable for properties that actually inherit? To address my own question... "color" might be such an example. But unless we can think of a broader set of problems this inheritance rule would address, I think the foreground color case is better handled by defining, in the HTML spec, that included monochromatic images and other figures should take on the colors of the document by giving one element value the document's (local) foreground color and the other element value 100% transparent. This strikes me as a genuine ambiguity in the HTML 4 spec. Is there any chance of seeing this amended (via an "errata" addendum?), or should I just cross my fingers and hope to see it in HTML 5? Braden
Received on Wednesday, 29 July 1998 23:17:33 UTC