Nah, already fixed it. Looks like I did not port a change I did for the
variant that breaks property inheritance to the compliant variant. As
soon as you use margin-left instead of start-indent the results came out
wrong because the code tried to unnecessarily back-calculate the margin
and from tha
> > > PS: There seems to be a problem, then, with the third paragraph
> > > of the
> > > attached fo file. IIUC it should be placed 1 cm right from the black
> > > border. And if I remove the start-indent="0" attribute from the fo:block
> > > it should be placed 2 cm right. WDYT?
> >
> > Yes, th
On Aug 1, 2006, at 20:29, Andreas L Delmelle wrote:
On Aug 1, 2006, at 20:06, Andreas L Delmelle wrote:
Again answering my own question/remark here:
Oops, sorry for the noise. Totally overlooked the outer block-
container... :(
On Aug 1, 2006, at 20:06, Andreas L Delmelle wrote:
Again answering my own question/remark here:
One way around this would be to exclude the inherited value of
start-indent if start-indent is specified on the FO.
That would make it:
*either* inherited *or* explicit, and not explicit *minus*
On Aug 1, 2006, at 19:53, Andreas L Delmelle wrote:
Might be caused by something like:
margin-left influences the start-indent property of the outer
block, and this latter property is inherited... I'd debug in that
direction: see what the call to PropertyList.getInherited() returns
in Ind
On Aug 1, 2006, at 15:44, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
On 01.08.2006 12:14:58 Vincent Hennebert wrote:
Well, with my working copy I get the following results:
When start-indent is explicitly set to "0cm" for the third paragraph,
the text is placed 1 cm /left/ from the black border:
http://atvaark.d
On 01.08.2006 12:14:58 Vincent Hennebert wrote:
>
> > > Ah yes, so this formula comes from the statement in 7.10.7 (BTW, in
> > > case
> > > of mixed writing modes / reference-orientations this statement is wrong;
> >
> > I don't think so. FOs like block-container create a viewport/reference
> >
> Ah yes, so this formula comes from the statement in 7.10.7 (BTW, in
> case
> of mixed writing modes / reference-orientations this statement is wrong;
I don't think so. FOs like block-container create a viewport/reference
pair. The viewport-area does the rotation, the reference-area is already
On 01.08.2006 09:52:42 Vincent Hennebert wrote:
> > Really want to dig that one out again? :-)
>
> He he ;-) I guess yes.
>
> I was starting to look at all the intrusion-adjustment and -displace
> stuff when I stumbled upon this issue. I need to have an absolutely
> clear understanding of that i
Really want to dig that one out again? :-)
He he ;-) I guess yes.
I was starting to look at all the intrusion-adjustment and -displace
stuff when I stumbled upon this issue. I need to have an absolutely
clear understanding of that if I want to implement side-floats
correctly.
Before I go int
Really want to dig that one out again? :-)
Before I go into details inline below, let me stress that the margin-*
properties are defined in XSL-FO for compatibility with CSS. They don't
play a direct role in the FO geometry. 5.3.2 simply tells us how to map
the margin-* properties to start/end-in
Hi all,
I think there is a problem in the spec regarding the space-start and
space-end traits for block-areas. The like-named properties only apply
to inline-level formatting objects, so I guess that for block-areas
those traits are indirectly-derived from other properties (start-indent
and margi
12 matches
Mail list logo
