- From: Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom@accesswave.ca>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 21:39:35 -0300
- To: <www-xsl-fo@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: www-xsl-fo-request@w3.org [mailto:www-xsl-fo-request@w3.org]On > Behalf Of Dave Pawson > Sent: July 9, 2002 11:50 PM > To: www-xsl-fo@w3.org > Subject: fo:block width="2in" > > Is it valid xsl-fo please? > > rec says applies to: all elements but non-replaced inline > elements, table-rows, and row groups > > fop list recently came up with > width is kind of shortcut for inline-progression-dimension and > CSS definition > > The appendix C says its basic. > > I can't see any issue with it? > > xep supports it, AH not (yet?) I just finished implementing the code for 5.3.3 in my and Eric Bischoff's xslfoproc formatter (http://www.bureau-cornavin.com/opensource/xsl-fo/index.html), so this is fresh in my mind. I tend to treat the CSS "Applies to" field with a grain of salt; as Ken points out the XSL-specific comments may supersede, and the final authority as to what is applicable to a given FO is the _FO_ description. In the case of 'block' none of the height/width/*-progression-dimension properties apply (Section 6.5.2). If they did then we'd see them explicitly mentioned, as we do for 'block-container' (Section 6.5.3). If we can't count on at least this much in the spec then we may as well all pack up and go home. I wouldn't consider height & width properties (all 6 of them) as shortcuts; they are the absolute counterparts to the relative '*-progression-dimension' properties. Just my opinion. Regards, Arved Sandstrom
Received on Tuesday, 9 July 2002 20:39:39 UTC