On 09.03.2011 19:48:12 Andreas Delmelle wrote:
<snip/>
> Especially relevant is the question what other implementations do. If
> they, too, exhibit the behavior that is now proposed as the default,
> then it could be a strong argument in favor. Often enough, a spec
> ultimately evolves to match the behavior of the majority of
> implementations.

A current version of Compart's FO engine handles the present case
exactly how FOP does without Vincent's patch. An older XEP 4.9 trial
lying around does the same.

OTOH, an older AntennHouse 4.2 trial behaves like after Vincent's patch.
Ecrion's current version, too.

So there really is a need for clarification.

> If they do what FOP currently does, then while awaiting a definitive
> answer from W3C, it could be kept non-standard, and enabled through a
> config-setting (as was done for indent-inheritance, and that turned out
> to be a correct choice; the intuitive behavior really was non-standard).
> 
> Perhaps there is a compliant, pure XSL-FO solution to this problem, that we 
> are overlooking (?)
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Andreas
> ---
> 




Jeremias Maerki

Reply via email to