Re: XSL:FO: Left ... Center ... Right [typo corection]

[Stephen Deach <sdeach@xxxxxxxxx>]

At 18:24 1999-10-17 -0700, Stephen Deach wrote:
>At 20:59 1999-10-17 +0100, you wrote:
>>Stephen Deach writes:
>> > This would not exactly center the word "Centre". It would be a reasonable
>> > expectation that it would generate equal-length inline-rules.
>> > Three samples:
>> > .................................................
>> > .                                               .
>> > .L                      C                      R.
>> > .                                               .
>> > .L           C           Bunch of stuff on right.
>>
>>Ah. If that is your interpretation of <fo:inline-rule>, then indeed I
>>am screwed. I was interpreting "length='auto'" as exactly similar to
>>TeX's infinitely expandable glue. "shall expand to fill any free space 
>>on the current line" does not imply to me that the result of two
>><fo:inline-rules> on the same line would produce the same length rule.
>
>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.
>
>>
>>By the way, Stephen's phrase "reasonable expectation" is pretty
>bothersome....!
>>
>> > The desired result can be created using position="absolute" or
>>
>>um. you mean I would say:
>>
>><fo:static-content flow-name="xsl-after">
>><fo:block>
>><fo:linline-sequence position="absolute"
>left="auto">Left</fo:linline-sequence>
>><fo:linline-sequence position="absolute"
>center="auto">Centre</fo:linline-sequence>
>><fo:linline-sequence position="absolute"
>right="auto">Right</fo:linline-sequence>
>></fo:block>  
>></fo:static-content>
>
>NO.
>For absolute positioning in the centered field:
>  you may not say "center='auto'",
>  you must specify:
>    position=absolute
>    left=[0]
>    right=[region-width] and 
>    text-align=center
>  to get the desired result.
>The left & right fields are analogous (l=0,r=width, text-align=L/R).
>      
>>
>>? I guess I could live with that, although it does not seem too natural.
>>
>> > using a table. (There may be other ways.)
>>
>>I thought about tables. In practice I backed away because my table
>>support is so bad that I could not make it work :-}
>>
>>But more importantly, I am very chary of table abuse. Is a three part
>>running footer really a *table*? Yes, it is to 99.9% of HTML coders,
>>but doesn't the political correctness lobby chide them for this dismal
>>attitude? I suppose its closer to a table than a list....
>
>I also worry about the use (abuse) of tables vs. providing a proper
>formatting tool to get the desired result. However, the use of "tabs" is
>even worse.
>  For many "two-zone" and "three-zone" headers and footers, tables are an
>acceptable mechanism. For those where the widths of the content doesn't
>fall into the cell widths the use of position="absolute" is a tolerable
>fallback.
>
>>
>>Sebastian
>>
>>
>> XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
>>
>>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>This e-mail reflects the personal opinion of the author.
> -- Unless explicitly so stated in the text, it does not represent an
>    official position of Adobe Systems, Inc.
> -- Unless explicitly so stated in the text, it does not represent an
>    official opinion of the W3C XSL Working group.
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Stephen Deach                            |  Sr Computer Scientist
>  408-536-6521 (office)                    |  Adobe Systems Inc.
>  408-537-4214 (fax)                       |  Mail Stop E15-420
>  sdeach@xxxxxxxxx                         |  345 Park Ave
>                                           |  San Jose, CA 95110-2704
>                                           |  USA
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
>
>

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail reflects the personal opinion of the author.
 -- Unless explicitly so stated in the text, it does not represent an
    official position of Adobe Systems, Inc.
 -- Unless explicitly so stated in the text, it does not represent an
    official opinion of the W3C XSL Working group.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Stephen Deach                            |  Sr Computer Scientist
  408-536-6521 (office)                    |  Adobe Systems Inc.
  408-537-4214 (fax)                       |  Mail Stop E15-420
  sdeach@xxxxxxxxx                         |  345 Park Ave
                                           |  San Jose, CA 95110-2704
                                           |  USA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list