Re: Regarding your comment on xsl-editors

Paul,

Thank you for your reply.  I have further questions on aspects of your 
answers.

Firstly, I am puzzled by your response, at the same time, to a question 
from Arved Sandstrom, who asked, inter alia, "Has any thought been given 
as to whether logical inheritance through page-masters and 
region-masters might also be desirable?"

Your response to him <[email protected]>
seems to me to imply that inheritance from, e.g., fo:region-body "will 
be considered for a future version of XSL."  However, in your response 
to me, you say that when 'inherit' is used, FOs within page-sequences 
*do* inherit from fo:region-body, when there is no specification in the 
ancestral line from fo:root.  These responses seem to me to be 
contradictory.  Could you please explain this further.

Do your comments about inheritance where 'inherit' is involved also 
apply to "normal" inheritance?

When a value is specified only on fo:root and (differently) on 
fo:region-body, does an FO within a page-sequence still inherit from 
fo_region-body?

I find it a complication for implementation that, according to the 
second part of your response, that properties not directly applicable to 
FOs in the layout-master-set, if defined within that set, are not 
available for inheritance.  In general, properties can be defined on any 
FO, so why this variation from that general principle?  According to 
this response, I must not only ensure that properties defined on 
layout-master-set elements become available to page-sequences which are 
laid out according to those master elements, but I must eliminate those 
properties which are not relevant to the layout-master-set elements. 
This distinction is not required elsewhere: if the property is defined, 
it is available for later use.


Peter


Paul Grosso wrote:
> Thank you for your comment to [email protected] archived at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xsl-editors/2002JanMar/0121
> 
> The XSL WG is going through the comments at this time, developing
> errata and lists of items to consider for a future version of XSL.
> 
> The following is our disposition of your above comment:
> 
> ---
> 
>>Could you please clarify for me the role of properties defined on
>>elements of the layout-master-set subtree in inheritance within
>>page-sequences.  For example, numerous properties apply to
>>fo:simple-page-master and the various regions which are not exclusive to
>>the layout-master-set.  These properties seem, in general, not to be
>>inherited, but to support the  `inherit' keyword.  When such properties
>>occur in an fo:flow with the `inherit' specifier, in the absence of any
>>specification in the line of descent from fo:root to the element in the
>>fo tree, but with a specified value on the relevant region-body, is the
>>computed value derived from the initial value or from the value
>>specified on fo:region-body?
> 
> 
> 
> Disposition: Explanation of XSL spec
> 
> It is derived from the value specified on fo:region-body. 
> 
> 
> 
>>When properties not directly applicable to the layout-master-set and its
>>children are specified on one of those children which later becomes
>>involved in the page generation for a flow, are those properties
>>inherited, of available for `inherit' specification, by children of the
>>flow?
> 
> 
> 
> Disposition: Explanation of XSL spec
> 
> No. 
> 
> 
>>When the from-nearest-specified-value function is invoked within a flow,
>>are the properties specified on the page master elements for the current
>>page also available to the function? "The value returned is that for the
>>closest ancestor of the formatting object for which the expression is
>>evaluated on which there is an assignment of the property in the XML
>>result tree in the fo namespace."
> 
> 
> 
> Disposition: Explanation of XSL spec
> 
> No. 
> ---

-- 
Peter B. West  [email protected]  http://powerup.com.au/~pbwest
"Lord, to whom shall we go?"