- From: Peter B. West <lists@pbw.id.au>
- Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:40:04 +1000
- To: xsl-editors <xsl-editors@w3.org>
The editors, The 2004-12-16 draft of the XSL 1.1 Recommendation discusses compound property inheritance as follows. <quote> Short forms may be used together with complete forms; the complete forms have precedence over the expansion of a short form. For example: space-before="4.0pt" space-before.maximum="6.0pt" is equivalent to a specification of space-before.minimum="4.0pt" space-before.optimum="4.0pt" space-before.maximum="6.0pt" space-before.precedence="0" space-before.conditionality="discard" Compound values of properties are inherited as a unit and not as individual components. After inheritance any complete form specification for a component is used to set its value. </quote> In the example given above, will a child of an element on which space-before="4.0pt" space-before.maximum="6.0pt" are defined inherit 1) space-before.maximum="6.0pt" or 2) space-before.maximum="4.0pt" ? My confusion arises from uncertainty as to what the phrase "as a unit" means. I assume that the result is 1), and that "as a unit" implies that, even though only "space-before" is defined as inheriting, the current state of the space-before "object" is what is inherited. If that is so, is there any functional difference in treating short-form compound properties as shorthands _with inheritance capability_, and treating the specific forms of an inheritable compound as themselves inheritable? Yours faithfully, -- Peter B. West <http://cv.pbw.id.au/> Folio <http://defoe.sourceforge.net/folio/> <http://folio.bkbits.net/>
Received on Saturday, 12 March 2005 00:40:14 UTC