Re: [xep-support] block-container w/in basic-link doesn't result in working link

From: W. Eliot Kimber (
Date: Thu Nov 07 2002 - 09:03:41 PST

David Tolpin wrote:
>>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>In the attached FO sample, the third link sample uses a block-container
>>inside an fo:basic-link to create an explicitly-sized "button". When I
>>render with 3.03, the button link isn't active. I use just fo:block (not
>>block-container), the link works. When I render this sample with XSL
>>Formatter, the link works.
> There was a a long and hot dispute a while ago on one of the list
> regarding the exact area that must be made hot according to the recommendation.
> The recommendation says that all 'containing' areas of a basic-link must
> be made hot. In XEP's opinion, that's an inline.

I'm not sure what "containing areas" means in 6.9.2, but in any case, I
don't see any "must" in that discussion at all. In fact, the spec leaves
the details of link activation behavior or anchor representation
completely unspecified.

> XSL Formatter makes all _contained_ areas hot, but that poses a lot of questions,
> such as whether absolute containers rooted at a basic-link, footnotes, floats
> and other things should be made hot too.

My expectation is what XSL Formatter does: that the inline areas
generated by the children of basic-link are hot. I don't see how it can
be any other way. Certainly do this enables a lot of interesting
applications, such as creating hotspots on graphics.

I would not expect footnote areas rooted in a basic-link to be hot, but
the spec certainly doesn't say one way or another that I can find.
However, I wouldn't consider it bad if a float contained within a
basic-link was hot. A footnote is another matter--one doesn't normally
think of the footnote as being part of the thing that anchors it--a
footnote is semantically an annotation of the thing that anchors it.
Floats have a less clear semantic--they might have an annotative
semantic relationship (e.g., marginal notes) or they might be just
achieving some formatting effect (like a dropped capital with wrapped text).

In general, I would think that being more inclusive rather than less
inclusive would be the better implementation choice.

           Set background-color on basic-link
> to see what exactly is the clickable area.

In my sample using block-container, if I set background-color to "red"
on basic-link the linkable area is a thin rule to the right of the work
"block" in the link preceding the rendered "button".



W. Eliot Kimber,
Consultant, ISOGEN International
1016 La Posada Dr., Suite 240
Austin, TX  78752 Phone: 512.656.4139
By using the Service, you expressly agree to these Terms of Service

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Dec 18 2002 - 08:41:28 PST