Oops, make that three differences: their content
models (child FO's that the spec says they can have)
are slightly different.
Glen
--- Glen Mazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- The Web Maestro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
or something. That way, it's all in one (since it
can apparently be
-Original Message-
From: Glen Mazza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 9:59 AM
1. fo:static-content is to be repeated from its start on
every page, and truncated if it doesn't fit.
You state this very simply and clearly here, but it has always struck me
--- Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Sorry to be such a nitpick, but the 1.0 Rec. states
literally:
An fo:marker is only permitted as the descendant of
an fo:flow.
and
An fo:retrieve-marker is only permitted as the
descendant of an
fo:static-content.
Thanks for the
Glen Mazza wrote:
if the static
content is directed to the region-body of the page.
Is this even allowed by the spec?
2.) Similarly, the StaticContentLayoutManager should
be renamed to SideRegionLayoutManager, because the
output of both fo:static-content and fo:flow can be
directed to it,
No, the
J.Pietschmann wrote:
Glen Mazza wrote:
if the static
content is directed to the region-body of the page.
Is this even allowed by the spec?
No, this isnt valid.
2.) Similarly, the StaticContentLayoutManager should
be renamed to SideRegionLayoutManager, because the
output of both
-Original Message-
From: Glen Mazza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
I see two LM classes that appear misnamed, which can
cause confusion as to their purpose:
1.) FlowLayoutManager is defined as the layout
manager for an fo:flow object -- but actually it can
also be for an
