Has there been any definite response from the W3C for your original bug filing that confirms your interpretation and agrees there is a problem? If not (and I don't see a response yet in the W3C bug report), then it may be premature to take a decision. It may be that your interpretation of the specification is not consistent with the XSL-FO group's interpretation, and that this difference is the source of the trouble.
G. On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:44 AM, Vincent Hennebert <vhenneb...@gmail.com>wrote: > I’d like to launch a vote for the integration of the patch from > Bugzilla #50763  into the Trunk. > > The implementation of fo:basic-link would deviate from the XSL-FO 1.1 > Recommendation, and behave as if the following sentence were added to > Section 6.9.2, “fo:basic-link”: > “The extent, in the block-progression-dimension, of the > content-rectangle of an inline-area generated by fo:basic-link, is > the minimum required to enclose the allocation-rectangles of all the > inline-areas stacked within that inline-area.” > > This sentence is borrowed, with minor modifications, from the definition > of the maximum-line-rectangle in Section 4.5, “Line-areas”. > > A bug  has been raised at W3C and the implementation may be changed > in the future to match the new requirements that may follow from its > resolution. > >  https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763 >  http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11672 > > +1 from me. > > Thanks, > Vincent >