Subject: Re: [xsl] Images and XSL FO From: Sebastian Rahtz <sebastian.rahtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 16:24:16 +0000 |
Paul Grosso writes: > Correct. The theory of floats is complex (anyone familiar with the > details of TeX's inserts and such, as I know Sebastian is, can > appreciate this, and what TeX does with floats is less than half > of the actual complexity), and the XSL WG decided we'd never get > the XSL spec out if we didn't make some simplifying assumptions > in this area (the other alternative was to leave vertical floats > out of XSL 1.0 altogether, and we didn't want to do that). So we > allowed for top floats only (and footnotes, but via the fo:footnote > FO) in XSL 1.0. I would have much preferred it if you had not been specific about *top floats*, but said simply that they floated somewhere else, details to be left to the formatter. No matter. I will assume that if PassiveTeX's floats end up at the bottom of the page, no-one will actually sue me. Now to see if I can make "side floats" work.... Sebastian XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Images and XSL FO, Paul Grosso | Thread | Re: [xsl] Images and XSL FO, Paul Grosso |
RE: [xsl] xsl:script, Shimon Pozin | Date | Re: [xsl] xsl:script, David Carlisle |
Month |