W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xsl-editors@w3.org > January to March 2005

Comments on 2nd WD (part 10)

From: Glen Mazza <glen.mazza@eds.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 17:23:25 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <20050310012325.32488.qmail@web80508.mail.yahoo.com>
To: XSL Editors List <xsl-editors@w3.org>

Editors:

More comments on the XSL 1.1 2WD:

91.  Section 6.4.1.2, Page-masters,
next-to-last-paragraph, beginning "For version 1.1 of
this Recommendation...", the following sentence should
probably be updated to account for the fact that now
more than five regions are definable for a
fo:simple-page-master, because multiple
fo:region-bodies are now allowed.  (I've noted this
earlier, #62, that content model for
fo:simple-page-master went from region-body to
region-body+ for this FO.)  It would also perhaps be
good to define here the benefit of multiple
fo:region-bodies within the fo:simple-page-master.

"For version 1.1 of this Recommendation, a page-master
will consist of up to five regions: "region-body" and
four other regions, one on each side of the body."


92.  Section 6.4.5, fo:page-sequence description. 
Recommend moving the implicit flow-map definition at
the end of this section to the fo:flow-map's
description instead.  (Section 6.4.22).  In exchange,
have the fo:page-sequence description reference the
implicit flow-map at this new location.  Reason:  The
fo:flow-map description appears to be the most
intuitive place to find the definition of the implicit
flow-map, and also is greatly helpful in understanding
how the fo:flow-map and its children FO's are supposed
to work.


93.  Section 6.6.10, fo:page-number description.  Four
typos found in the Constraints section (see below). 
Also, "inline area" as well as a few other terms in
this section are bolded more than once.  (I believe
normally only the first instance of each important
term is bolded in the document.)

"The content of the inline-area depends on the
reference-page and the reference-page-sequence. For
the fo:page-number the reference-page is the page on
which the inline-area is placed and the
-->referene-page-sequence<-- is the ancestor
fo:page-sequence of the fo:page-number.

The child areas of this inline-area are the same as
the result of formatting a result-tree fragment
consisting of the content of any fo:folio-prefix child
of the -->referene-page-sequence<--, -->follwed<-- by
fo:character flow objects; one for each character in
the folio-number string and with only the "character"
property specified, followed by the content of any
fo:folio-suffix child of the
-->referene-page-sequence.<--"


94.  Section 6.6.13, fo:folio-prefix and Section
6.6.14, fo:folio-suffix.  Prose needs to be added to
the content model descriptions of these two FO's to
forbid the inclusion of fo:page-number,
fo:page-number-citation, and
fo:page-number-citation-last descendants.  Reason: 
All three of the page-xxx FO's are available in the
%inline; parameter entity (which fo:folio-prefix &
-suffix have defined for them), yet the area
generation of these 3 FO's employ fo:folio-prefix &
-suffix.  If fo:folio-prefix and fo:folio-suffix are
allowed to have any of the page FO's as children, it
appears infinite recursion would occur.


95.  This is more of a post-1.1 suggestion I think,
but the Editors may wish to let fo:folio-suffix and
fo:folio-prefix be initial optional children of the
fo:page-sequence-wrapper (in addition to
fo:page-sequence), in order to let these fo's be
"inherited" by the fo:p-s-w's child fo:page-sequences.
 I believe postponing this for post-1.1 may be a
better option however, because I suspect there may be
demand for more functionality (such as common
fo:static-content FO's) to be "factored out" in this
manner, and extensive analysis of all the consequences
of such a change will probably be needed before
proceeding.


96.  Section 6.4.6, fo:page-sequence-wrapper, section
on Trait Derivation.  Sentence:  "Except for 'id', the
fo:page-sequence-wrapper has no properties that are
directly used by it."  Actually, three properties are
now defined for fo:p-s-w:  ID, index-class, and
index-key.  


97.  Section 6.4.7, fo:layout-master-set, Common
Usage.  I would recommend removing "region-masters"
and adding "flow-maps" (new in 1.1) to the description
below:

"The fo:layout-master-set is a wrapper around all
masters used in the document. This includes
page-sequence-masters, page-masters, and
region-masters."

Reason:  Region-masters are actually defined *below*
simple-page-masters.  This definition seems to imply
that region-masters are direct descendants of the
fo:layout-master-set, however, which can be confusing
to the reader.


98.  Section 6.4.10,
fo:repeatable-page-master-reference.  The sentence
below somehow needs rewriting/rephrasing, because
there is no fo:repeatable-page-master formatting
object.  (Perhaps better to use "page-master referred
to by this formatting object" instead.)

"If no region-master child of the
fo:repeatable-page-master has a region-name associated
to any flow in an fo:page-sequence, then the
sub-sequence is constrained to have length zero."


99.  Section 6.4.11,
fo:repeatable-page-master-alternatives, Common Usage
section.  Recommend adding an "etc." to the end of
this sentence to make it more grammatical:

"The full set of conditions allows different
page-masters to be used for the first page, for odd
and even pages, for blank pages-->, etc.<--


100.  Section 6.4.11,
fo:repeatable-page-master-alternatives, Constraints
section.  Using the present tense seems to be more
natural here:

"These children [will be-->are] called alternatives."


Regards,
Glen Mazza
Apache FOP Team
Received on Thursday, 10 March 2005 01:23:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:58 GMT