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 [1] 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 [2] 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.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
> [2] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11672
>
> +1 from me.
>
> Thanks,
> Vincent
>

Reply via email to