- From: Martin Bryan <mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 11:43:07 -0000
- To: <sca@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: <xsl-editors@w3.org>
Sharon Congratulations on a very good XSL WD. Needless to say I have some comments! What follows are just my initial comments, on a quick read-through. Page Sequence The model of page-sequence as (static-content*, flow) has some worrying implications. Firstly there is the question of things like dictionary headers, where the contents of the "static-content" depend on the contents of the flow. Secondly there is a question of display timing in web environments, where I would prefer to be able to display the flow before the static content, rather than the other way around. Is there any reason why you could not extend the model to (static-content*, flow, static-content*) ? This would also serve to make stylesheets more natural as you could define the static content for the region-before, then the one for the region-body and then the region-after rather than, as at present, always having to define the region-after before the region-body because the latter is a flow rather than static content. The use of margin-top, margin-bottom, margin-left and margin-right in place of space-before, space-after, space-start and space-end should be deprecated so that we get them phased out asap. Similarly other uses of top, bottom, left and right will eventually lead to user errors in multilingual setting unless deprecated. (I realise the imperative for ease of change over from CSS, the propensity of Latin language on the Web, etc. I also realise the advantages of mixing Hebrew/Arabic and Latin languages on the same page using a stylesheet with one entry per element, which is only possible if you replace the left/right convention with a start/end one. In any other case you need a separate stylesheet statement per writing direction. This means that any changes to the style may have to be done twice, with a greatly increased chance of errors occuring. ) Note that this applies to things like floats (and clear) for which, to me, absolute positions do not really make sense in the overall model. The presumption for page numbering seems to be that it will be based on incrementable numbering, with no overrides, or allowances for numbering using non-adjacent chararacter sequences. What happens if, at some stage, I want to number pages alphabetically, but forbid the use of I, O and V? (Typo warning: look out for initial-page-numer) Thoughts re scroll-bars and rotated viewports. Does it make sense to allow rotation of a scrollable viewport on a "page", or of its contents? Scrollability is a feature of web tools, not printed text. Scroll bars are designed to move you from top to bottom of the viewport contents or from start to end of a line, but the convention on all computers I have seen is that the vertical scroll bar moves you from top to bottom while the horizontal one moves you from start to end. There should be no need for scroll bars on anything that has been "rotated with respect to the page area". (Viewport rotation should be viewed with scepticism!) The rules for defining column reference-areas seem to make it impossible to define unequal width columns (as used on many web pages as well as some magazine layouts) or more than two columns each with space for a change bar. (I'm surprised Microsoft have not complained about this!) Why does <fo:initial-property-set font-variant="small-caps"/> get transformed into <fo:initial-property-set font-variant="small-caps"> </fo:initial-property-set> during formatting? Surely either it stays as an empty tag or the end tag gets moved to the end of the text that is to go in the block. Otherwise it seems to be coming along nicely. Martin
Received on Thursday, 13 January 2000 07:40:56 UTC