This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: XSL FO conformance
- To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: Re: XSL FO conformance
- From: "Sebastian Rahtz" <sebastian dot rahtz at computing-services dot oxford dot ac dot uk>
- Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 21:17:37 +0100 (BST)
- Cc: xsl-editors at w3 dot org
- References: <3.0.32.20000405144231.0177bb00@pophost.arbortext.com>
- Reply-To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
Paul Grosso writes:
> >"extended". But Appendix C does not do the same for properties. Is
> >there a list somewhere which I have missed?
>
> See "C.3 Property Table: Part II", the fifth column of that table.
fifth column? I only see 3. I assume Netscape has failed to print the
subsequent ones.... grrr.
<irony>any chance of a version of the XSL FO spec produced using a
decent XSL FO engine?</irony>
> The OASIS (nee SGML Open) Exchange Table Model [1] that is one of the
> most widely implemented ones includes table headers but not table
> footers. So in this case, it might not be "able to implement"
> issues, but "already deployed software, interfaces, documents,
> and user-education" issues that put table-footer in the extended
> category. Certainly, that is my position.
thanks. I will not say I agree with the philosophy (!), but now I understand.
> list-item-body." I believe that is intended to mean that *some*
> implementation of list-item-label (i.e., that described as the fallback)
> must be implemented in all (e.g., basic) implementations, but the full
> semantic (that also handles multi-line labels) is an extended feature.
ok, thats fine. i am now clearer on this bit
sebastian
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list