- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 13:03:27 +0000
- To: xsl-editors@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6268 --- Comment #1 from Tony Graham <Tony.Graham@MenteithConsulting.com> 2008-12-18 13:03:27 --- >From http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xsl-editors/2007JulSep/0010.html: I have an additional question pertinent to this thread. The content models for fo:folio-prefix and fo:folio-suffix seem to be inconsistent with the "Areas" description for fo:page-number, fo:page-number-citation, and fo:page-number-citation-last. (A similar issue may exist for the index-related formatting objects as well, but I can't yet see for sure). Each of these "Areas" descriptions indicates that the object "generates and returns a single normal inline-area". If this is true, then it seems that no block-level objects should be allowed as descendants of fo:folio-prefix and fo:folio-suffix. Although block-level objects are currently prohibited as immediate descendants (children), they would currently be permitted in succeeding generations as children of fo:basic-link, fo:inline-container, etc. On the other hand, if block-level descendants are permitted, then I think those objects needs to be have an "Areas" description similar to that for fo:inline, that is: "... generates one or more normal inline-areas. The [object] returns these areas together with any normal block-areas ... returned by the children of the [object]." -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 18 December 2008 13:03:36 UTC