RE: [Moderator Action] RE: block width="2in"

This is getting complex Max ;-)
Thanks for the reply.

> > Some contradiction?
> 
> The boxes describing width and height are copied straight out of CSS2,
> so I agree that it looks like a contradiction, but my opinion is that 
> the list of properties that apply to an FO takes precedence 
> over the text
> in the boxes. 

In other places in the spec, that has (mostly) been clarified.


> This is my opinion, not the working group's.

Noted.

> 
> > I'm going with 7.14.12 as the contra position.
> 
> I am not. For 'width' and 'height', below the box, it says [[XSL
> modifications to the CSS definition: In XSL, this property is mapped
> to either "inline-progression-dimension" or
> "block-progression-dimension"]]

Could I have a plain English interpretation of that please?
I don't understand the phrase 'this property is mapped to'.

> 
> For those two properties there is no contradiction, as 7.14.1 says
> "This property specifies the block-progression-dimension of the
> content-rectangle for each area generated by this formatting object."
> 
> This doesn't specify which FO the property applies to so we can take
> from the listed properties for fo:block that it doesn't apply.


OK, so you are implying that the chapter 6 list of properties takes
precedence over the 'backwards' references from property via applicability?

Perhaps that could be stated somewhere in the rec?

regards DaveP



- 

NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is 
confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the 
intended recipient you are hereby notified that you must not use, 
disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on this email's content. If 
you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender 
immediately and then delete the email and any attachments from your 
system.

RNIB has made strenuous efforts to ensure that emails and any 
attachments generated by its staff are free from viruses. However, it 
cannot accept any responsibility for any viruses which are 
transmitted. We therefore recommend you scan all attachments.

Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email 
and any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily 
represent those of RNIB.

RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227

Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk

Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2002 06:04:25 UTC