On Thursday 16 June 2005 03:48, L. David Baron wrote: > On Wednesday 2005-06-15 18:40 -0700, L. David Baron wrote: > > Your "should be" statements don't make sense. The declaration 'content: > > counter(item) "," counters(item, ".")' can only produce results of the > > form "x,y.z" if x is equal to z, since the last part of the counters() > > is the same as what counter() produces. > > A better way of saying what I was trying (badly) to say there is: > > counter(item) is *always* a final substring of counters(item, "."). > (Not necessarily a proper substring, though, since when only one counter > named "item" is in scope, they're the same.) > I think I just confused myself here. I had for some reason gotten the impression that counter nesting had been limited to children now. Fortunately that is not the case. `AllanReceived on Thursday, 16 June 2005 12:40:36 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:37 GMT