- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 13:39:50 +0000 (UTC)
- To: fantasai <fantasai@escape.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, fantasai wrote:
>
> This text here is not very tight.
> What happens with
> <div style="text-decoration: underline">
> <p>paragraph</p>
> <p>paragraph</p>
> <p>paragraph</p>
> </div>
> or
> <table style="text-decoration: underline">
> <tr>
> <td>content</td>
> </tr>
> </table>
> ?
Issue 255.
> This seems to say the span element in
> text<span> </span>text
> will not be underlined.
> Is that what you meant?
Yes.
> # This was arguably allowed by the looser wording in CSS2. SVG1,
> # CSS1-only, and CSS2-only user agents may implement the older model
> # and still claim conformance to this part of CSS2.1. (This does not
> # apply to UAs developed after this specification was released.)
>
> Does this exception apply to new releases of older UAs?
No, since they were developed after this specification was released.
> From http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2003Apr/0202.html :
> > It's not clear how this would be handled:
> >
> > span {letter-spacing: 2px}
> >
> > word<span>spaced out</span> word2
> >
> > Is spacing be applied before the 's' or after the 't'?
...and other letter and word spacing issues.
Issue 256.
> # This is best avoided by using the natural bidirectionality of characters
> # instead of explicit embedding levels.
>
> It's not always possible to rely on implicit bidi, which is why we *have*
> embedding levels. You shouldn't discourage their use like this. The problem
> is best avoided by keeping start and end tags close to the text: by not
> putting spaces at the start and end of inline elements.
It's _best_ avoided by using implicit bidi only, although granted, if you
have to use it, other techniques such as those you describe could be used
too.
The other comments were not considered important enough to be added to the
list at this late stage.
--
Ian Hickson )\._.,--....,'``. fL
U+1047E /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
http://index.hixie.ch/ `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2004 08:39:52 UTC