Subject: Inlline-rules (Was: XSL:FO: Left ... Center ... Right) From: "Nikolai Grigoriev" <grig@xxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 21:55:30 +0400 |
At Monday, October 18, 1999 7:02 AM, Stephen Deach wrote: >So, given 2 or more inline-rules in a line,what do you expect? The most >logical choices are: > "disallowed" > which is not supported in the history of typographic applications, or > "equalize length" > which is what every publishing industry product I know of (or have > worked on) has done. (Thus the genesis of the phrase "reasonable > expectation".) >> >>Nikolai's contention that the <inline-rule>s would actually each fill >>up the entire rest of the line, yielding three lines, bothers me. Do >>other people read "length='auto'" that way? that it is processed >>sequentially, instead of being applied when the rest of the line is >>complete? > >Per above,this would be the least-rational treatment of the option. Steven, sorry for annoying you. I see I was wrong in my treatment of inline-rules with length="auto". Can you confirm or reject my revised interpretation of "equalized length" behaviour: rule length for <fo:inline-rule length="auto"> is calculated *after* all other inline sequences on the line are formatted. The remaining free space is divided equally between all such elements on the line. I have a couple of further questions on this: 1) Is there any lower limit for the rule length? I mean, if the remaining free space is zero, do we really need to suppress the correspondent elements? We could require the length to be not less than the rule-thickness, or link it somehow to the current font metrics - I don't have any idea. 2) What about making 'length' a composite property, with max/min/opt/etc like in space-*? Regards, Nikolai Grigoriev RenderX XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: Cross-referencing, Leigh Dodds | Thread | XSL: Returning a selected node in t, дл |
Re: Cross-referencing, Francis Norton | Date | RE: Cross-referencing, Leigh Dodds |
Month |