Re: Underlined Text

Subject: Re: Underlined Text
From: "Nikolai Grigoriev" <grig@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 03:47:20 +0400
Sebastian Rahtz wrote:

> actually, the code is only right if you are using a year old version
> of the draft spec, and not the current one.

Right ;-). In an up-to-date FO implementation, fo:inline-sequence should become
either fo:wrapper or fo:inline; but AFAIK in FOP's dialect, fo:inline-sequence
is still valid. Anyhow, in our experiments with FOP two weeks ago,
text-decoration was unsupported (see

BTW: I do recommend this page to FOP users and developers (no kidding!). I have
spent four days adapting our test cases to FOP, and I believe the resulting set
of tests gives a clear picture of FOP's current state. (In my opinion, these
files may be quite useful for FOP development team;  it's a pity that we haven't
got any feedback from them.)

Nikolai Grigoriev

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread