- From: Bruce Miller <bruce.miller@nist.gov>
- Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 22:43:04 -0400
- To: www-math@w3.org
[Prefix all w/ IMHO .. the group will discuss this...] On 04/21/2010 09:23 PM, Karl Tomlinson wrote: > ... I believe the issue stems from there being two ways to think of mathbackground (& mathcolor) being allowed on mstyle. (1) is that mstyle is a presentation element, and so it accepts the mathbackground attribute. The effect is described in 3.1.10, namely it fills the bounding box of the element (and it's children). But (2) is that the mathbackground attribute is accepted on mstyle since the mathbackground attribute is accepted on _other_ presentation elements (see 3.3.4.1). In such cases, the effect is to change the default mathbackground. Those effects are subtly different, as you noticed. .. and in fact, I think (2), is kinda screwy [mathcolor seems to bypass the screwiness by having it's default be inherited, anyway]. I would argue that (1) ought to take precedence since it's just so much more direct. But seriously, you raise a good point that we should be clearer about that (assuming we all agree). And for the math element, I think it should get all the attributes of mstyle... and also the reasons mstyle gets them! In other words, I think it would be more natural and useful for math@mathbackground to set the background for the contents, not the default.
Received on Thursday, 22 April 2010 02:44:01 UTC