View Single Post
Old 08-13-2022, 07:05 PM   #35
enuddleyarbl
Guru
enuddleyarbl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.enuddleyarbl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.enuddleyarbl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.enuddleyarbl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.enuddleyarbl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.enuddleyarbl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.enuddleyarbl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.enuddleyarbl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.enuddleyarbl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.enuddleyarbl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.enuddleyarbl ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
enuddleyarbl's Avatar
 
Posts: 784
Karma: 1538394
Join Date: Sep 2013
Device: Kobo Sage
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNSB View Post
To quote from the Mozilla page you linked to in the Specification section:

CSS Text Decoration Module Level 4
Yep. Sorry. I didn't see that note about the spec level. Also, even if I had seen it, I don't think I'd have realized what it meant. But, after doing a bit more searching on text-decoration-width (which, as Turtle91 pointed out was the earlier term for text-decoration-thickness), I came across this 2016 issue in Github about it:

https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/239

Blood was flowing a bit in there. That issue was closed in 2017 because the proposed text-decoration-width solution was accepted into the draft spec of the next css version:

https://drafts.csswg.org/css-text-de...kness-property

It's also interesting that the 2017 issue referenced a 2012 message on the same problem:

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public...2Jul/0445.html

Regardless, I don't think there's any way around this until either something is fixed with kepubs or the next css version goes live.

I haven't tried RbnJrg's method because, frankly, I don't understand it.
enuddleyarbl is online now   Reply With Quote