https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=168716
--- Comment #4 from Mike Kaganski <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Michael Otto from comment #3) > My bugreport wanted to address: > If a background is set and then removed again, the background is > set to "transparent" instead of removing the fo:background-color item > (and the VIEWING problem appears also with > fo:background-color="transparent"). > Setting the background to None shall restore the previous state: > no fo:background-color item any more. This specific point is NOTABUG. "Explicitly no background" is not the same as "background is not set here". E.g., when your (parent) style has background, and you want to make the specific paragraph with that style to have no background, it is not enough to make sure that there's "no fo:background-color item" - that would mean "we don't define any override; use the inherited setting". And it holds even when there was no inherited background. The program has no (and should not have) mind-reading abilities; my "explicitly set no background" could mean e.g. "I intend to set up styles later; so no matter what I will set to the style later, I explicitly want this paragraph to have no background". This is what Telesto meant by "I'm told this being by design". Yes it is. If your current bug is explicitly and exclusively about this, it must be closed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
