On 27.02.2006 16:25:03 Manuel Mall wrote: > On Monday 27 February 2006 23:16, Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > On 27.02.2006 16:02:32 Manuel Mall wrote: > > > On Monday 27 February 2006 22:53, Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > > > On 27.02.2006 15:22:14 Manuel Mall wrote: > > > > > On Monday 27 February 2006 22:12, Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > > > > > On 27.02.2006 14:59:31 Manuel Mall wrote: > > > > > > > On Monday 27 February 2006 21:33, Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > > > > > > > On 27.02.2006 12:36:58 Manuel Mall wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Monday 27 February 2006 18:55, Jeremias Maerki > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > <snip/> > > > > > > > > > > > Wait a sec! suppress-at-line-break only applies to > > > > > > fo:character not to general text content!!! I think it is > > > > > > less complicated than you think right now. > > > > > > > > > > In XSL-FO everything becomes a fo-character during > > > > > "objectification" (XSL-FO spec page 4 (pdf version) at the top) > > > > > IMO it therefore applies to every character not just those > > > > > explicitly defined as <fo:character.../>. > > > > > > > > Hmm, you're right. I forgot about that. But in the end, this only > > > > clarifies that, for example, fixed width spaces are never > > > > suppressed (not even at a break) except if they are in an > > > > explicit fo:character element with > > > > suppress-at-line-break="suppress". This property applies only to > > > > fo:character and is not inherited, so you can't specify it on > > > > fo:block, IMO. I feel we're getting closer. > > > > > > Yes, that is my interpretation as well. > > > > > > Side question: Do I understand correctly that only inheritable > > > properties can be put on ancestor objects (Spec 5.1.4)? If so, and > > > as suppress-at-line-break is not inheritable what sense does the > > > allowed value "inherit" than make? > > > > No, you can actually specify any property anywhere. But if a property > > does not "apply" to an element it is not evaluated/used by it. I used > > to believe that we should warn about the use of non-inherited > > properties on elements these properties don't apply to, but the > > "inherit" value is exactly the reason why this is perfectly legal, > > although this may add to the overall complexity for the user with > > (IMO) little benefit. I've never had to use "inherit" before. > > > > You are confusing me: Further above you said that > "suppress-at-line-break" cannot be specified on a fo:block but now you > seem to say it can, it just does not apply. Why is 5.1.4 saying > "inheritable properties can be placed on any formatting object" when > according to your interpretation any property (be it inheritable or > not) can be placed on any object.
Sorry, wasn't my intention. I'm still adjusting to the fact that I was under a different belief earlier. XSL-FO, Page 4 (PDF, bottom) says: "Although every formatting property may be specified on every formatting object, for each formatting object class, only a subset of the formatting properties are used to determine the traits for objects of that class." That's what I was missing earlier. That's also why there probably is no official XML Schema for XSL-FO. :-) Jeremias Maerki
