- From: Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom@accesscable.net>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 20:39:51 -0300
- To: <www-xsl-fo@w3.org>
I posted a long diatribe on this subject last night, from the wrong address, so Max Froumentin gets it as list moderator. For all I know he'll accidentally turf it, or he's away, so I'll distill my comments here and try again. Maybe it's just me, but I've been dissecting the language of the spec as it pertains to markers (fo:marker and fo:retrieve-marker), and I'm unhappy. I understand the "intent" of the associated properties and I think I understand how markers are intended to work, and if I'm willing to suspend strict interpretation of what the spec actually says, I could proceed further with FOP implementation, which is what I'm doing right now. But I happen to be very rigid when it comes to specs, and so I'm stalled out. Problem: there is a circularity in the discussion pertaining to fo:retrieve-marker. According to this language - "The term "containing page" is used here to mean the page that contains the first area generated or returned by the children of the retrieved fo:marker." Also, "The fo:marker whose children are retrieved is the one that is (conceptually) attached to the area that is at the top of this hierarchy." In other words, considering these statements in isolation, the "containing page" is determined _once_ we have selected the "best" area in the hierarchy (the set of qualifying areas) - that "best" area fixes the f:marker that is to be used, and that fixes the "containing page". My question: so how is it that when we are using properties on fo:retrieve-marker like "retrieve-boundary" and "retrieve-position" that we can refer to the "containing page"? The whole point of that exercise is to find the "best" area - we don't necessarily even know the page yet. How can we use a datum ("containing page") to help determine, ultimately, itself? Answer: with great difficulty. In order to figure out what the "containing page" is, we need to know the "containing page". That just won't cut it. What's obviously implied in the whole line of discussion is the notion of "current page", not just "containing page". The current page (the page with the active fo:static-content and fo:retrieve-marker) is clearly significant, but it doesn't get mentioned in this section of the spec at all, not once. I'm looking for some clarification of the language, pretty much to confirm what are already my working but unfounded assumptions, so I can proceed with more confidence. It's not like I'm lost as to what the spec is trying to achieve; I just wish the langauge was more solid and not, well, wrong. :-) Thanks much. Regards, Arved Sandstrom
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2001 19:42:15 UTC