I tried to make something out of bug 684. Again, after
reading the spec in depth, I'm nearly biting pieces off
my keyboard.
In the tables.fo examples, the left edge of the table
content rectangle is the same as the edge of the reference
area, and left border (should I use "start edge border"?)
is tacked on so that it extends outside the reference area.
The upper and lower border, however, do not overlap previous
or following blocks, as expected.
Well 4.4.1 says
  the start-edge of its allocation-rectangle ... offset from it
  inward by a distance equal to the block-area's start-indent
  plus its start-intrusion-adjustment (as defined below)
  minus its border-start, padding-start, and space-start values...
given that the start-indent of the tables are zero (hopefully),
the behaviour regarding the border extending left beyond the
edge of the refernce area appears to be consistent with the spec,
albeit IMO a bit counter-intuitive, because not consistent with
what happens in BPD.

Now, what is the problem bug 684 complains about? Does it mean
the border in BPD should be handled similarly to what happens in
IPD? Or does he mean something else?
And, of course: is my understanding on how borders/padding should
be handled resonable? I feel very confused.

BTW what happens if both start-indent and margin-start were
defined on the same block area?


To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to