This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
2.8.2 states "There’s no imperative state for an fo:number, i.e. it’s not a counter or an variable. " Yet 2.8.4 states "The "reset-level" determines the level that the fo:number’s internal state in FO processor needs to be reset to its reset-value." There appears to be some conflict here? suggest either define 'imperative state' or remove the statement from 2.8.2 since clearly an initial value and 'state' is required.
I can find no requirement that an fo:number be an integer, yet it appears implicit.