RE: Wording for spaces produces interpretation differences among implementations

The XSL FO SG has discussed this and believes
the wording in the spec is correct rather than
your proposed rephrasing.

Consider a <p> that gets mapped into an fo:block that, 
due to the amount of content, generates two areas on 
two consequtive pages.  We do not want the space before 
the fo:block to occur also on the 2nd page. 

Paul Grosso
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: Monday, 2005 October 10 4:13
> To: xsl-editors@w3.org
> Subject: Wording for spaces produces interpretation 
> differences among implementations
> 
> 
> Dear editors, 
> 
> the Apache FOP team has recently stumbled over a problem 
> concerning the
> interpretation of the space properties. We've documented the 
> problem and
> our interpretation on our Wiki:
> http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics-fop/XslFoSpecificationUncer
> tainties/SpaceTraits
> 
> A quick check reveals that there are differences of 
> interpretation among
> FO implementations. In case our interpretation is correct, I'd like to
> ask the WG to consider a change in wording for the space properties
> which eliminates the ambiguity.
> 
> Instead of:
> Specifies the minimum, optimum, and maximum values for the 
> space before any areas generated
> by this formatting object and the conditionality and 
> precedence of this space.
> 
> I'd write:
> Specifies the minimum, optimum, and maximum values for the 
> space before
> each area generated by this formatting object and the 
> conditionality and
> precedence of this space.
> 
> Instead of:
> Specifies the value of the space-specifier for the space before the
> areas generated by this formatting object.
> 
> I'd write:
> Specifies the value of the space-specifier for the space before each
> area generated by this formatting object.
> 
> This is for space-before. The wording would need to be changed for the
> other space properties accordingly.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Jeremias Maerki
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 18 January 2006 19:37:19 UTC