6320 2008-12-18 14:43:01 +0000 Explicit Row Height, table-cell’s Borders and border-separation 2009-01-13 12:45:07 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XSLFO XSL-FO 2.0 Working Draft All All ASSIGNED http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xsl-editors/2008JanMar/0002 P2 normal --- 1 tgraham alb.w3c vhennebert xsl-editors oldest_to_newest 22800 0 tgraham 2008-12-18 14:43:01 +0000 As far as I can tell the XSL-FO 1.1 Recommendation doesn’t indicate whether an explicit height set on a table-row element should include the table’s border-separation and the children cells’ border widths, or not. In section 7.15.6, a reference to CSS 2 is made “for a discussion of the ‘height’ property in tables”, but the CSS 2 Recommendation is itself not clear what the height of a cell should be in this context. Also, in section 6.7.9, “fo:table-row”, the “row-height trait” is mentioned but is not referenced anywhere else. So, in the following example: <fo:table table-layout="fixed" width="100%" border-collapse="separate" border="1pt solid black" border-separation="6pt"> <fo:table-body font-size="8pt" line-height="10pt"> <fo:table-row block-progression-dimension="45pt"> <fo:table-cell border="2pt solid black"> <fo:block>Cell 1</fo:block> </fo:table-cell> <fo:table-cell border="5pt solid black"> <fo:block>Cell 2</fo:block> </fo:table-cell> </fo:table-row> </fo:table-body> </fo:table> What should be the final block-progression-dimensions for the cells? There are 3 possibilities: 1. the explicit row height shall include the cells’ borders and the table’s border-separation: - height of cell 1 = 3 (half of border-separation) + 2 (border-before) + 10 (b-p-d) + 2 (border-after) + 3 (half of border-separation) = 20pt - height of cell 2 = 3 + 5 + 10 + 5 + 3 = 26pt - height of row = max(explicit row height, height of cell 1, height of cell 2) = 45pt As a consequence the final block-progression-dimensions of the cells are re-evaluated to match the row’s explicit height: - b-p-d of cell 1 = 45 - (3 + 2 + 2 + 3) = 35pt - b-p-d of cell 2 = 45 - (3 + 5 + 5 + 3) = 29pt 2. the explicit row height shall include the cells’ borders but not the table’s border-separation: - height of cell 1 = 2 + 10 + 2 = 14pt - height of cell 2 = 5 + 10 + 5 = 20pt - height of row = max(45, 14, 20) = 45pt So the final block-progression-dimensions of the cells would be: - b-p-d of cell 1 = 45 - (2 + 2) = 41pt - b-p-d of cell 2 = 45 - (5 + 5) = 35pt 3. the explicit row height shall include only the cells’ block-progression-dimensions: - height of cell 1 = 10pt - height of cell 2 = 10pt - height of row = max(45, 10, 10) = 45pt So the final block-progression-dimensions of the cells would be: - b-p-d of cell 1 = 45pt - b-p-d of cell 2 = 45pt But then what would be the final row height? Should it be re-computed as in the case where the row height is left to auto? Then: - height of cell 1 = 2 + 45 + 2 = 49pt - height of cell 2 = 5 + 45 + 5 = 55pt - height of row = max(49, 55) = 55pt So final b-p-ds of the cells: - b-p-d of cell 1 = 55 - (2 + 2) = 51pt - b-p-d of cell 2 = 45pt There are some hints in the Recommendation which would tend towards solution #2, but a clarification in this area would be much appreciated. 22801 1 tgraham 2008-12-18 14:45:52 +0000 From http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xsl-editors/2008JanMar/0011: For version 2.0 of XSL the WG has decided to rewrite the text of the table formatting objects to be independent of the CSS2 Recommendation in order to be able to specify more fully the expected results that in many cases are left open by the current text with its references. The lack of precision that you have identified will be corrected. As these modifications will lead to some of the existing implementations becoming non-conformant (having taken a different imlementation choice, that is permitted in XSL 1.0 and 1.1, than what will become normative) the WG feels that this cannot be part of an erratum to 1.0 or 1.1, but will have to wait until 2.0. 23031 2 tgraham 2009-01-13 12:45:07 +0000 Adding original poster as CC. Response from original poster required to resolve bug report.