Subject: RE: [xsl] fo:inline vs. fo:wrapper From: DPawson@xxxxxxxxxxx Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2002 12:48:18 +0100 |
> > if you specify long inlines, then you need to account for overflows. > > > > David, > > inlines do break accross lines, and nothing is wrong in it. They do it > nicely in XEP. rec 6.6.7 The fo:inline formatting object generates one or more normal inline-areas. But if the content of an inline is only pcdata, does the formatter still break it David? I thought not? 4.7.2, 3rd para seems to imply the formatter does this when building up line areas to form a block. 4th para gives one exception Forced line-breaks are respected. Specifically, if A is the glyph-area generated by a fo:character whose Unicode character is U+000A, then A must be the last area in its containing subset Si. I just don't think the problem is with the inlines; I'm > waiting for the code example. <grin/> I thought there was something else there! 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 XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] fo:inline vs. fo:wrapper, David Tolpin | Thread | Re: [xsl] fo:inline vs. fo:wrapper, David Carlisle |
RE: [xsl] tags?, martin | Date | RE: [xsl] more encoding woe, DPawson |
Month |