> "J.Pietschmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Try passivetex. You have to install a full TEX package, apart from
> this it is quite excellent.
Doesn't it also have problems with keep-* attributes?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EM
Mete Kural wrote:
> Is there any estimate on when the "keep-together"
> property will be implemented?
No.
> The FOP Project is great although as you know it's
> still being developed. While I wait for FOP to be
> developed, what other free XSL-FO formatters can I use
> to generate PDFs?
Try pas
David B. Bitton wrote:
> Can someone give me a 100 words or less on keep-together? What I'm most
> confused is using 1 through 9 as apposed to always. I think my
> keep-together problem would be solved with this, but I'm not sure how to use
> it. Tx :)
I don't think keep-together will solve yo
> Subject: Re: Keep-together (and the other keep-*'s)
> It's not against spec in my book either, but it's currently not
> implemented in FOP, for table-row or for anything else.
> The problem with all that keep-* stuff is that it's not that easy to do.
> Actu
n table-row considered against spec?
>
> pa
>
> On 17 Jul 2001, at 9:36 Alex McLintock wrote about Re: Keep-together
> (and the other ke :
>
> > --- Struan Judd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > If so might I request a small departure from the XSL:FO spec,
9:36 Alex McLintock wrote about Re: Keep-together
(and the other ke :
> --- Struan Judd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If so might I request a small departure from the XSL:FO spec, if it is
> > straight-forward to implement. Please allow keep-together on
> > fo:table-r
At 09:36 AM 7/17/01 +0100, Alex McLintock wrote:
> --- Struan Judd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If so might I request a small departure from the XSL:FO spec, if it is
>> straight-forward to implement. Please allow keep-together on fo:table-row.
>>
>
>I don't think deviations from the XSL:FO spec
--- Struan Judd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If so might I request a small departure from the XSL:FO spec, if it is
> straight-forward to implement. Please allow keep-together on fo:table-row.
>
I don't think deviations from the XSL:FO spec are either wise or going to
be popular.
Alex
Falk,
keep-together is not supported presently..
Try keep-with-previous or
keep-with-next..
That may help.
Raju Dave
- Original Message --
"Falk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From:"Falk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date:Mon, 18 Jun 2001 10:04:27 +0200
Subj
