/ "Bang, Steinar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
| <ul>
| <li><a name="d108b1b1b1b1a"></a><p>This is para</p>
| </li>
| </ul>
|
| If I lose the <p> element, it displays correctly in Opera, and
| AFAICT should display correctly in all browsers.
This is a really ugly boundary case. If it was <li><p>, I'd say the
browser was definitely broken. But the intervening <a> might
reasonably be construed as an inline and then the <p> should cause a
break.
Ideally, this should be <li id="d108b1b1b1b1a"><p>, but that doesn't
work in lots of browsers. So it would be best if the browser was a
little smarter and ignored the intervening empty tag, but...
| My questions are:
| Is the same HTML generated in the current XSL stylesheets?
Yes and no. I think the current stylesheets no longer output anchors
for list items that don't have an explicit ID. But if you put an ID on
a listitem, then yes.
| Does anyone know specifically which .xsl file to go to tweak it?
If you add a template for listitem/para[1] to your stylesheet, you can
suppress the p.
| This email, its content and any attachments is PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL to
| TANDBERG Television. If received in error please notify the sender and
| destroy the original message and attachments.
You're joking, right? "Private and confidential" mail to a public
list? And I can't be the only one that finds the idea that you could
obviate me, after the fact, to destroy something you sent to me
(intentionally or otherwise) absurd.
Be seeing you,
norm
--
Norman Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Some disguised deceits counterfeit
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | truth so perfectly that not to be
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | taken in by them would be an error
| of judgment.--La Rochefoucauld
