The test, for example, is:
<P>
This is a paragraph with an <EM>emphasized</EM> sentence.
<EM>This <Q>block<Q> of text is the emphasized sentence,
isn't it?</EM> Are you suggesting <EM>rendering</EM>
rules for <DFN>tangent</DFN> (touching) borders?
</P>
With the following stylesheet:
EM: border.style = single
DFN: border.bottom.style = double
# a possible shorthand for border.bottom.style is underline.style
Possible rendering (1)
....................................
This is a paragraph with an:emphasized section. This ``block'':
.................................:.......................::::::::::::
:is the emphasized sentence, isn't it?:Are you suggesting:rendering:
:.....................................: :.........:
rules for tangent (touching) borders?
:::::::
Possible rendering (2)
....................................
This is a paragraph with an:emphasized section. This ``block'':
.................................:::::::.................::::::::::::
:is the emphasized sentence, isn't it?:Are you suggesting:rendering:
:.....................................: :.........:
rules for tangent (touching) borders?
:::::::
Possible rendering (3)
....................................
This is a paragraph with an:emphasized section. This ``block'':
.................................: ...................::::::::::::
:is the emphasized sentence, isn't it?:Are you suggesting:rendering:
:.....................................: :.........:
rules for tangent (touching) borders?
:::::::
I'm not sure from your post if this is what you mean... if it is, I propose
that we add a few border.merge attributes that define the rendering
of the top and bottom borders when they intersect in multiline
character-level bordered regions:
border.merge = normal | seperate | join
where normal is (1), seperate is (2), and join is (3). Note that the word
"rendering," although it is in the same border style as "The ``block'',"
is always seperated, since it is not part of the same EMphasized region.