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

RE: xsl-fo first anniversary

From: Ian Tindale <ian_tindale@yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 18:08:32 +0100
To: <www-xsl-fo@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000801c276c8$fda0b620$fc00a8c0@solstice>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-xsl-fo-request@w3.org [mailto:www-xsl-fo-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Dave Pawson
> Sent: 18 October 2002 17:52
> To: www-xsl-fo@w3.org
> Subject: Re: xsl-fo first anniversary
> 
> 
> At 11:53 18/10/2002, David Carlisle wrote:
> 
> 
> >Also of course you can say things like, if the rendered size of this
> >object is too wide, typeset in landscape, or at a smaller point size, or
> >in some other format altogether. (latex can typeset something into a
> >"box" measure it and if it's not suitable, throw it away and typeset it
> >in a different box in a different style).
> 
> Generalising that would fit many of the requests we've heard.
> If this X doesn't fit into this Y box, do this.
> If the figure doesn't fit into 'rest of page'
> If this block doesn't fit into page do this
> etc.

There could involve quite a choice of tactics, such as stepping down point size, stepping down tracking, switching to a more condensed font within the same family, if there is one, switching to a condensed font outside that family if not, if that's undesirable, artificially compressing the font horizontal scaling (but not something that can be done within XSL-FO - unless you're dealing with a XSL-FO wrapped character based on SVG fonts (which might not be a bad idea in terms of consistency)), or perhaps even trying different justification rules. Depends which sort of thing you're fussier about, and which is 'house style'.
-- 
Ian Tindale
Received on Friday, 18 October 2002 13:08:45 GMT

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