Re: [Fwd: Regarding your comment about inline building on xsl-editors]

[Peter B. West]

Keiron,

Thanks, and thanks for the references.  I haven't had time to look at 
this in detail yet, but I will as soon as possible.  Do you feel as 
queasy about this as I do?

Peter

Keiron Liddle wrote:
Hi Peter and others,

The answer appears to be a clarification of the the spec authors had in
the minds when writing it.

The answer is what I was originally thinking it meant, that is that a
block area under an inline is not wrapped by an inline area but rather
the block area becomes a sibling of the lines areas created for the
inline areas.
so:
block
inlinesome text blocka block/block more text/inline
/block

is the same as:
block
inlinesome text /inline
blocka block/block
inline more text/inline
/block

The block may inherit some properties from the inline but it is not
wrapped by the properties of the inline or wrapped by an inline area
that has traits.

Here are some references that I could find:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-devm=97951301002986w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-devm=102011250524180w=2



--
Peter B. West  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/
Lord, to whom shall we go?


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[Fwd: Regarding your comment about inline building on xsl-editors]

[Peter B. West]

  Fopdevs,

For those of you who are not subscribed to the xsl-editors list.

Comments please.  I've been trying to track down the original discussion 
that triggered my request ot the editors, in hopes of being able to 
enter into the mind-set of inline-building again, but at the moment I'm 
just confused.

Peter

 Original Message 
Subject: Regarding your comment about inline building on xsl-editors
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 18:37:10 -0500
From: Paul Grosso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Peter B. West [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Peter,

Thank you for your comment to [EMAIL PROTECTED] archived at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xsl-editors/2002AprJun/0031

We determined that the spec required some corrections to address
your question.  We would appreciate it if you could let us know
if you feel that our proposed changes sufficiently address your
questions.

The following is our proposed disposition of your above comment:

---

We propose the following corrections to the spec:

1. the Areas portion of 6.9.2 [fo:basic-link] be changed from:


  The fo:basic-link formatting object generates one or more normal
  inline-areas.  The fo:basic-link returns these areas, any
  page-level-out-of-line areas, and any reference-level-out-of-line
  areas returned by the children of the fo:basic-link.

to:

  The fo:basic-link formatting object generates one or more normal
  inline-areas.  The fo:basic-link returns these areas,
  together with any normal block-areas,
  page-level-out-of-line areas, and reference-level-out-of-line
  areas returned by the children of the fo:basic-link.


2. The same changes should be made to 6.6.2 [fo:bidi-override] and 6.6.7
  [fo:inline], which have the same difficulty.


3. In section 4.7.3 [Inline-building] the following phrase
   (that describes the subject of the ordering constraints):

  the normal and/or anchor inline-areas
  returned by the child formatting objects,

should be changed to:

  the normal and/or anchor inline-areas
  and normal block-areas
  returned by the child formatting objects,

---

Please Reply (cc-ing [EMAIL PROTECTED]) if you wish to make
an objection to our resolution.

Thank you for your interest in XSL.

Paul Grosso for the XSL FO Subgroup of the XSL WG 




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]