- From: Matthew Brealey <thelawnet@yahoo.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 03:46:27 -0800 (PST)
- To: www-style <www-style@w3.org>
--- Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu> wrote: > >From: Ian Hickson <py8ieh@bath.ac.uk> > >Date: Thu, Jan 27, 2000, 1:40 PM > > > > > > On Wed, 26 Jan 2000, Matthew Brealey wrote: > >>> I know that neither Opera not Mozilla currently underline images as > >>> they should. > >> No no no. > > > > Yes yes yes. ;-) > > > > If 'text-decoration' is applied to a SPAN element which contains, > > amongst other things, some text, then all the contents of the SPAN > > should be underlined, since the underlining spans all descendants. > > > > Thus: > > > > <span style="text-decoration: underline"> > > <em>some text</em> > > <img src="..." alt="an image"> > > <em>some text</em> > > </span> > > > > ...would result in: > > > > some text [X] some text > > ----------------------- > > > > ...and not: > > > > some text [X] some text > > ---------- ---------- > > > > Note that the EM and IMG elements do not have 'text-decoration' set. > > The underlining does not apply to the IMG element at all, since it is > > not _set_ on the IMG element. > > Yes, Ian is correct. > > This is how text-decoration works in CSS-1 and CSS-2. In fact, this > case is > tested in the CSS-1 test suite. Indeed it is, but I though we were on CSS-2 now. The wording of CSS-1 and CSS-2 is different, so I don't see how much use something that was designed for an old spec is - the CSS-1 test suite tests for 'spanning', which is referred to in CSS-1 but not CSS-2. In fact: <q> If the element has no content or no text content (e.g., the IMG element in HTML), user agents must ignore this property. </q> It seems to me that this creates a pretty strong presumption against underlining images - it does not say 'it must ignore this property except when it is underlined due to an ancestor element'. I don't see why the interpretation as spanning (rather than , as the *current* spec says, 'affecting') should be made. It gives ugly results. > >On Wed, 26 Jan 2000, Matthew Brealey wrote: > >> I know that neither Opera not Mozilla currently underline images as > >> they should. > > When making statements like that, at a minimum out of respect for the > implementers, you really should check the CSS1 test suite first to see > if it > agrees (or perhaps even helps demonstrate) your assessment. If you > disagree > with the CSS1 test suite (which has been worked on long and hard by many > many > CSS experts), bring that up and also send mail to css-test@w3.org Seems you've gotten a little confused. I did not write that - Ian Hickson did (in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2000Jan/0174.html) So perhaps before you make statements like that you should check whether the person whom you accuse of making such statements has actually said what you think they did. ===== ---------------------------------------------------------- From Matthew Brealey (http://members.tripod.co.uk/lawnet (for law)or http://members.tripod.co.uk/lawnet/WEBFRAME.HTM (for CSS)) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com
Received on Friday, 28 January 2000 06:46:30 UTC