Re: Page Breaks Inside Tables and border-separation
I don't think you'd have much luck that way. Volunteering for building up an up-to-date test suite would be much more helpful because that could directly be used for compliance testing. Jeremias Maerki On 28.11.2007 13:41:25 Vincent Hennebert wrote: > Hi, > > Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > >> I’ve sent a request for clarification on xsl-editors@ > > > > Good idea. Due to the lack of a useful XSL test suite that is the only > > way to improve interoperability between implementations. Some day, I'll > > take on this task.. > > Makes me think of it: does anyone know why there are no more graphics in > the Rec illustrating some specification details (except that graphics > are more difficult to create and maintain than text)? That’s the first > thing I’m doing when trying to understand a new one. > > This is like the intent behind some rules: at many places of the spec it > is obvious that a rule was created to achieve a specific rendering; > having the rendering intent together with the rule would greatly help to > understand that latter. I seem to remember that someone told this was > the case in draft pre-versions but that they were removed from the final > version, which is unfortunate. > > Shall I submit those suggestions on [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Vincent
Re: Page Breaks Inside Tables and border-separation
Hi, Jeremias Maerki wrote: >> I’ve sent a request for clarification on xsl-editors@ > > Good idea. Due to the lack of a useful XSL test suite that is the only > way to improve interoperability between implementations. Some day, I'll > take on this task.. Makes me think of it: does anyone know why there are no more graphics in the Rec illustrating some specification details (except that graphics are more difficult to create and maintain than text)? That’s the first thing I’m doing when trying to understand a new one. This is like the intent behind some rules: at many places of the spec it is obvious that a rule was created to achieve a specific rendering; having the rendering intent together with the rule would greatly help to understand that latter. I seem to remember that someone told this was the case in draft pre-versions but that they were removed from the final version, which is unfortunate. Shall I submit those suggestions on [EMAIL PROTECTED] Vincent
Re: Page Breaks Inside Tables and border-separation
On 27.11.2007 18:29:33 Vincent Hennebert wrote: > Hi Jeremias, > > Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > You find that surprising? You should be used to that by now. :-) > > That was ironical. Looks like I still have progress to make in terms of > joking in English :-\ D'oh. Well, there's a problem you can't do anything about: I'm not natively English speaking and mail traffic doesn't have the same expressiveness as spoken language. I guess that's why they invented smileys. ;-) > > I think > > the spec can be interpreted both ways. Have you checked what other > > implementations do? If you find only one behaviour, we've missed > > something. ;-) > > And what if each implementation does something different? ;-) > > I’ve sent a request for clarification on xsl-editors@ Good idea. Due to the lack of a useful XSL test suite that is the only way to improve interoperability between implementations. Some day, I'll take on this task.. Jeremias Maerki
Re: Page Breaks Inside Tables and border-separation
Hi Jeremias, Jeremias Maerki wrote: > You find that surprising? You should be used to that by now. :-) That was ironical. Looks like I still have progress to make in terms of joking in English :-\ > I think > the spec can be interpreted both ways. Have you checked what other > implementations do? If you find only one behaviour, we've missed > something. ;-) And what if each implementation does something different? ;-) I’ve sent a request for clarification on xsl-editors@ Thanks, Vincent
Re: Page Breaks Inside Tables and border-separation
You find that surprising? You should be used to that by now. :-) I think the spec can be interpreted both ways. Have you checked what other implementations do? If you find only one behaviour, we've missed something. ;-) Jeremias Maerki On 21.11.2007 12:19:56 Vincent Hennebert wrote: > Hi, > > Surprisingly enough I found something unclear in the specification > regarding breaks in tables: > In the separate border model there is a border-separation property that > specifies the distance between adjacent cells. The questions are: > - if there is a break in a table, between cells (regardless of whether > the table’s border is conditional, see below), should the last cells > on the page also have half of the border-separation after them? > Technically speaking there are no adjacent cell after them... > I’d say yes, and that’s how the current code behaves, because the spec > explicitly states that for cells the border has two components, but... > - if the corresponding border is conditional > (border-before/after-width.conditionality = discard), should the > border-separation also be discarded? The question holds for fo:table > as well as for fo:table-cell (when there is a break /inside/ it) > > I tend to think that the separation should be discarded if so is the > border, but I’d welcome confirmation on this topic. And that may lead to > funny things, for example if a two-column table has a conditional > border-after, so has the cell on the first column, but the cell on the > second column has a retained border. The bottom of the first cell will > align with the bottom of the region-body, but for the second cell there > will be /half/ of the border-separation between its border-after and the > bottom of the region-body. Follow me ;-) ?
