- From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 06:56:03 +0100
- To: "Max Berger" <max@berger.name>
- Cc: www-xsl-fo@w3.org
Please don't post to multiple lists at the same time. On 06/07/07, Max Berger <max@berger.name> wrote: > I am now a little confused about the spec on alignment-adjust. My > Reference is xsl-fo 1.1 [1] > > 7.31.22 "vertical-align" Something wrong. http://www.w3.org/TR/xsl11/#alignment-adjust 7.14.1 or http://www.w3.org/TR/xsl11/#vertical-align 7.31.22 "vertical-align" I'll assume the latter. > > [...] shift-direction to bottom-to-top > > Which together results in: a positive value will shift towards bottom > (lower the box), while a negative value shifts towards top (raise the > box),which is contradictory to the specification before. > > I may have missed something, but I believe this is contradictory. > Could someone please clarify on this? All relative to the baseline, see http://www.w3.org/TR/xsl11/#area-alignment the figure? The alphabetic baseline is the horizontal reference point for vertical placement of a glyph. To tweak this, we shift this http://www.w3.org/TR/xsl11/#baseline-shift (suggestion is for graphics etc) The assumed 'positive' direction (shift direction) is pos = up for Western scripts. That makes superscript move nearer the top. Hence setting this inverted might make sense. > [...] shift-direction to bottom-to-top > > Which together results in: a positive value will shift towards bottom > (lower the box), while a negative value shifts towards top (raise the > box),which is contradictory to the specification before. So now 'super' would *lower* the graphic when baseline shift is set to a positive number. As to why you'd want to do this .... Mmmm. HTH -- Dave Pawson XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. http://www.dpawson.co.uk
Received on Saturday, 7 July 2007 05:56:05 UTC