Dear Karmal,
I read your mail as first this morning and it kind of struck me.
Usually my fop mail gets filtered out into the fop box, but your mail
came through the filter.
The subject struck me first, then I read the mail. The syntax of the
mail hints that it is about fop, but the words / concepts used kind of
struck a chord in me.
Imposes a keep-together condition with strength "always" in the
appropriate context.
Wow!
I was hoping to see an email from a woman I met recently. I have known
her for only a week but the experience has been a profound and powerful one.
So I kind of read your mail with that mindset.
. . . got me thinking again . . .
Cheers, kindest of regards,
Michiel Roos
Kamal Bhatt wrote:
Hi
I noticed a feature of keep-together="always". Basically it does
exactly that, even when it doesn't make sense. That is, it will
overflow a block instead of breaking across a page. Now, I have looked
at the standard, and it is fairly airy fairy about what
keep-together="always" actually does:
*"always*
Imposes a keep-together condition with strength "always" in the
appropriate context."
What appropriate context means is anyone's guess. From what I have
read, some have interpreted this to mean that "always" is the highest
possible strength. Seems to me that makes sense. So is this bit of
"functionality" a bug?
Cheers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
