On 03 Mar 2011, at 13:08, Vincent Hennebert wrote: >> <snip /> >>> Unless, of course, I have completely missed the point, which might well >>> be the case. >> >> Only forgot to check the history/legacy --as did I when I filed bug #46826 > > Frankly, I’m not willing to look at the XSL-FO 1.0 Recommendation. > I don’t have the energy to understand the logic that’s explained there, > understanding one version is already hard enough.
Of course. I just meant that it sounded a bit like there was no logic whatsoever behind what is currently implemented. At first, I had my doubts too, until I decided to take a look at 1.0. The least it does, is offer an explanation as to why things are the way they are. Regards, Andreas ---
