Oleg Tkachenko wrote:
How? Karen is about table header/footer, not static content.
As described in another mail today...
I'd like to encapsulate both cases under one root, to keep things together, e.g.:
Well, that's something to consider.
And that's allowed only in table header/footer content, right?
No, I'd like to allow it for every element which can generate more than one regular area due to page breaks, i.e. for block, inline, block-container, table, table-cell, list-block, list-block-item etc. Well, some of them make less sense than others, but clever code reuse will probably give most of it for free. It makes sense for example if you have a lengthy blockquote or list and you want to make the reader aware that its continued on the next page. That the requirement popped up for tables only until now is mostly due to the fact that various legal practices and standards require it for tables. Granted, implementing it for tables only would be sufficient due to the blind table technique, but why impose unnecessary restrictions?
> EXSLFO Yes, please.
I subscribed to the discussion list, let's see what happens next. J.Pietschmann --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
