On 09/03/2011 16:56, Glenn Adams wrote:

Hi Glenn,
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.


It's true that that the W3C may not agree with this view, but without a change it is not possible to make an image a clickable link, which is a fairly common requirement.

Thanks,

Chris


G.

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:44 AM, Vincent Hennebert <vhenneb...@gmail.com <mailto: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