W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xsl-editors@w3.org > October to December 2005

Re: Deliberate breaking of indent inheritance

From: Jeremias Maerki <dev@jeremias-maerki.ch>
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 17:38:34 +0100
To: <xsl-editors@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20051211172709.55BF.DEV@jeremias-maerki.ch>

Thank you, Paul! We are very much in agreement on this topic, it seems.
This week, I've implemented an alternative set of rules that tries to
mimic the behaviour of some of the other implementations out there. The
"feature" is switched on through a configuration option. This is simply
due to user demand.

Anyway, what I'm missing a little is a reference to the topic about a
test suite for XSL-FO. It would make a very strong tool for
communicating the expected behaviour established by the specification.
What does the SG think about this?


On 09.12.2005 21:35:43 Grosso, Paul wrote:
> 
> Jeremias,
> 
> Thank you for your interest in XSL-FO and your
> detailed discussion below.
> 
> The XSL-FO SG has had many long discussions about
> how inheritance works in XSL FO over the years.
> We do realize that there are some consequences of
> the current inheritance model that makes for some
> results that may be unexpected for some users.  This
> is somewhat unavoidable in that there are (at least)
> two ways inheritance could work, and both ways are
> useful in certain circumstances, and the current
> spec picked one of those two ways. 
> 
> However, the spec is not unclear in the matter of
> inheritance (I think you agree on this).  The SG has 
> some indication that the various implementations are,
> in fact, bringing themselves in line with the spec in
> this regard.
> 
> The best way to improve the spec would be to add the 
> capability of requesting the "other" form of inheritance 
> for indents.  However, such an addition to the spec is 
> not within the scope of the XSL 1.1 work.  
> 
> The SG would urge implementors to implement the spec
> as written.  If it is felt it is important to provide
> the "other" form of inheritance, it should be done via
> a namespaced extension property.  Preferably, implementors
> who desire such an extension can agree on its general
> syntax, and perhaps a future version of XSL can incorporate
> something like that.
> 
> paul
> 
> for the XSL FO SG
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xsl-editors-request@w3.org 
> > [mailto:xsl-editors-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jeremias Maerki
> > Sent: Wednesday, 2005 November 30 6:48
> > To: xsl-editors@w3.org
> > Subject: Deliberate breaking of indent inheritance
> > 
> > 
> > Dear Editors,
> > 
> > a few months ago I documented my interpretation of the XSL-FO 1.0
> > specification in terms of start-indent and end-indent inheritance on a
> > Wiki page [1]. This is also the way I've implemented the functionality
> > in Apache FOP (see 0.90 alpha1, not 0.20.5). I've come to realize that
> > Apache FOP is currently the only implementation known to me 
> > that doesn't
> > deliberately break the property inheritance rules for start-indent and
> > end-indent properties over reference-area boundaries.
> > 
> > The XSL WG's disposition on comment 20, item 4 in [2] clearly states
> > that there's merit to stick to the rules. Obviously, I 
> > personally agree
> > with this decision but the situation produces unexpected results for
> > inexperienced FO users. That's certainly the main point why many
> > commercial implementors have chosen to break the inheritance rules in
> > this case although this creates an interoperability issue.
> > 
> > Since today XSL-FO is possibly worse concerning interoperability than
> > HTML I'd like to ask the XSL WG to reevaluate this topic and 
> > to restate
> > their updated opinion in this matter. I don't mind if the WG changes
> > their opinion.
> > 
> > Furthermore, in my opinion, it is necessary to find a way to improve
> > interoperability between implementations as a whole. It has become a
> > major nuisance. If all implementors sticked their heads together to
> > create an official test suite, it could help improve the 
> > situation a lot
> > and it would certainly help clarifying problem spots in the
> > specification as well as put a certain pressure on implementors to
> > improve interoperability. I'd be willing to invest some 
> > effort in this.
> > Are there other parties that would be willing to help?
> > 
> > [1] http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics-fop/IndentInheritance
> > [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/08/28-XSL-PR-DOC.html
> > 
> > Thank you!
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Jeremias Maerki
> > 
> > 
> > 



Jeremias Maerki
Received on Sunday, 11 December 2005 16:46:30 GMT

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