[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: DOCBOOK: Issues with processing expectations of the proposedannotation element
At 09:09 2002 06 26 -0400, Jason Foster wrote: ><snip/> > >Would a marginalia be considered an annotation? Since "annotation" is a logical concept and "marginalia" is (at least as used here) a presentation, it is certainly the case that one could want to present an annotation as a marginalia [a marginalium?], but... >In textbooks a (somewhat) common layout is to divide the page into two columns (65%,35%?) where the inside columns contain the full text and the outside columns contain a paragraph-by-paragraph summary. A while back Norm described this as marginalia, and I would be tickled pink if it became a part of DocBook (and the FO stylesheets!) > >Jason Foster ...defining precisely how marginalia should be formatted and being able to support them in composition systems is very difficult.* In particular, neither XSL 1.0 nor CSS supports marginalia. Hence I did not consider the possibility of marginalia when I outlined the processing expectation issues of the proposed annotation element. But thanks for bringing it up, at least as an issue. paul * Marginalia are floating constucts which are already tricky, but they are further complicated by the fact that their composed locations are supposed to be vertically aligned with their anchor in the flowing text. Not only is this hard to do at best, but it's not even easy to define. For example: what is the proper alignment when you have two marginalia on the same word?; what do you do when marginalia anchored near the bottom of the page won't all fit on that page?; what happens when the anchors for two marginalia are closer together than the height of the first marginalia?, etc.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC