On 03 Mar 2011, at 13:08, Vincent Hennebert wrote:

>> <snip />
>>> Unless, of course, I have completely missed the point, which might well
>>> be the case.
>> Only forgot to check the history/legacy --as did I when I filed bug #46826
> Frankly, I’m not willing to look at the XSL-FO 1.0 Recommendation.
> I don’t have the energy to understand the logic that’s explained there,
> understanding one version is already hard enough.

Of course. I just meant that it sounded a bit like there was no logic 
whatsoever behind what is currently implemented. At first, I had my doubts too, 
until I decided to take a look at 1.0.

The least it does, is offer an explanation as to why things are the way they 



Reply via email to