Jeremias Maerki wrote:
[Glen Mazza]
So Luca is correct that both fo:simple-page-masters
should generate the same overall margins of 50 pt.
each, no?
No. :-)
Ok, now I am convinced you are right.
Thanks for all your explanations, I always found this part of the
recommendation quite obscure!

--- Glen Mazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This IMO is the fatal flaw in your logic in your
previous email. You determined fo:s-p-m and fo:r-b
to
be type (1) FO's, and hence used the wrong equations
in 5.3.2 to determine calculated values for them.
They are type (3) FO's, and hence the first

Damn, Glen, thanks for being so insistent. I was indeed wrong. You
didn't really give me the prove I needed to be rewired but you got me
looking again all over the spec and I found what was wrong:
It doesn't really matter if the FOs generate reference areas or not, the
key is that 5.3.2 is

--- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It doesn't really matter if the FOs generate
reference areas or not, the
Well, the Recommendation declares which of the three
types each FO belongs to, in the Areas section in
each FO definition. It is a static answer that holds
for all FO's of a