W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xsl-editors@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: xslfo20 design notes feedback

From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 09:51:24 +0000
Message-ID: <711a73df1001140151w59d14439s925573d33f0defb8@mail.gmail.com>
To: liam@w3.org
Cc: xsl-editors@w3.org
Thanks for the reply Liam et al.

2010/1/14 Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>:
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 01:39:01PM +0100, Dave Pawson wrote:
>> 2009-10-09T09:52:33Z
>> Comments on http://www.w3.org/TR/xslfo20/
>> Author: Dave Pawson.
>> Comments to xsl-editors@w3.org

>> 2.2.1.3 "distance"
>>    Perhaps better named as 'dimension', since that is how it is
>>    described? Even when it is a percentage this makes more sense.
>
> We'll consider it; note that the property is not naming a dimension,
> but is giving a distance between two points.

>From my tech drawing days, the distance between two points
was a dimension?




>> 3.2.6 Spanning cell over all row and columns
>>       Zero as a value seems to be a case of seeing a bad example and
>>       following it? 'all' seems far more practical and intuitive. The
>>       terminology for properties is becoming depressingly obtuse.
>
> Thank you - we agree with you.  Unfortunately, HTML already uses zero
> for this purpose; for now, we have noted this as an open issue for
> the next publication of our draft.

As I said, see a bad example and follow it!
Hope to see it changed in the next draft.



>
>> 3.4.1 fo:spread-page-master
>>       Very welcome!
>>
>> 3.5 Bleeds and Trim
>>      More weak, old fashioned terminology? It may be accurate and
>>      appropriate for a typographer and setter. Is it appropriate for
>>      the user of this specification? IMHO - no.
>
> We do have requirements to support bleed and trim, coming from
> people doing that old-fashioned paper stuff :-)  The terms
> are standard in the industry and very much in use today.  Or
> are we misunderstanding you?

"The industry" and a W3C rec are not the same thing. I see no
reason to assume every user of xsl-fo is an ex type-setter?
  At least give us a glossary of 'old fashioned'  terms to
something more modern? Even if it requires a graphic to
explain it.






>> 7. Images.
>>    Ability to centre an image vertically on a page. Here or earlier?
>>    I.e. Leave a header and an image as an odd page decoration or to
>>    break some sort of page sequence
> Wouldnt you do this in the page master?

Just so long as I can do it... though generating a special
page master just for such an odd page seems.... odd?

>
>> 7.4. Callouts
>>      yes please! 'Ensure positioning, so I can label aunt Izabel and
>>      uncle Joe.
>
> Ah, 6.1.2. Yes, we don't have a good solution for this yet, beyond
> an SVG overlay.

x=horizontal offset from top-left of graphic
y=vert offset from top-left of graphic?

docbook has a solution, where the co xml:id='n' generates the location
of the callout text. Unsure if this would meet your needs.


>
> Thank you for taking the time to view our draft!
>
> The XSL-FO Subgroup.


Welcome, and good luck.

regards

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
Docbook FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
Received on Thursday, 14 January 2010 09:51:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 14 January 2010 09:52:05 GMT