If it helps, I fully agree with Andreas' opinion on both points.
On 14.04.2005 20:00:41 Andreas L. Delmelle wrote:
> I must say I'm not absolutely sure about this... Other opinions, anyone?
Jeremias Maerki
> -Original Message-
> From: Luca Furini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Andreas L. Delmelle wrote:
>
> > IIC, what is meant is:
> > the space-* of the contained blocks should be seen as _content_
> > of the list-item, such that they are not ignored, but their
> > values are _included_ in the
Andreas L. Delmelle wrote:
> IIC, what is meant is:
> the space-* of the contained blocks should be seen as _content_ of the
> list-item, such that they are not ignored, but their values are _included_
> in the total BPD without influencing the spacing between previous and
> following list-items.
> -Original Message-
> From: Luca Furini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Luca,
> Working on lists, I found a couple of paragraphs in the recommendation
> whose meaning is not fully clear to me.
>
> Section 6.8.3. (fo:list-item) states that:
> "the block-progression-dimension of the conten
Working on lists, I found a couple of paragraphs in the recommendation
whose meaning is not fully clear to me.
Section 6.8.3. (fo:list-item) states that:
"the block-progression-dimension of the content-rectangle of an area
generated by the fo:list-item is just large enough so that the
allocatio
