W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xsl-fo@w3.org > March 2002

Re: Pushing the Limits

From: Peter B. West <pbwest@powerup.com.au>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 13:33:35 +1000
Message-ID: <3CA28F0F.2000805@powerup.com.au>
To: "'Www-Xsl-Fo" <www-xsl-fo@w3.org>


Arved,

I would have agreed with you on this point, until Paul's post. Reading 
the spec again, I realized that, if "always" is stronger than any 
numeric value, it is of infinite strength.  In fact, the spec, in 4.8,
has: the value| "always"| being stronger than *all* numeric values (my
emphasis).

Given that, it is reasonable 
to conclude that an "always" keep cannot be broken under any 
cicumstances, which is what "always", independently of the particulars 
of the spec, always means.

Peter

Arved Sandstrom wrote:

>Hi, Paul
>
....

>
>Number 1, the spec does _not_ ascribe any special semantics to the "always"
>value on keeps. Certainly not in Section 4.8, nor in Sections 7.19.3-5.
>"always" is meant to be a value which defines a keep stronger than any
>number value. In B&W, that's all it says. Couple that with the assertion in
>Section 4.8, that
>
>"The area tree is constrained to satisfy all break conditions imposed. Each
>keep condition must also be satisfied, except when this would cause a break
>condition or a stronger keep condition to fail to be satisfied."
>
>and I cannot conclude from this that "always" is treated one special way and
>all numeric values are treated another way. I don't doubt that this is what
>you _intended_.
>
Received on Thursday, 28 March 2002 20:33:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 3 October 2007 16:06:09 GMT