On Sep 25, 2005, at 05:19, Manuel Mall wrote:
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 01:22 am, Andreas L Delmelle wrote:
getValue() or getEnum() would always return the original enum value,
but the additional getters would provide access to the
scaled-baseline-table that is the result of the enum value...
What do you and Finn or others familiar with the fo.properties
package think about that? Would this work?
Hmm, not sure about this one. The actual rules for computing his
compound value are actually a bit involved and require information
possibly not readily available to the property system.
Aha, then this could also be precisely the reason why the
dominant-baseline property cannot return a value of
scaled-baseline-table, but its enum value should be used further
downstream where all the necessary information has become available.