Re: [office-comment] 14.5.23 - should support odd-page and even-page,and breaking before and after

[Michael Brauer <Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM>]

David,

the OASIS Open Office specification uses a slightly different way to 
specify left and right pages than XSL-FO. In the Open Office 
specification, paging is based on so called master pages. A master page 
contains for instance the definition of headers and footers, but also 
specifies the formatting properties of a page. These are contained in a 
so called page layout that is a separate style. It is referenced from 
master pages by its name. The page layout contains an attribute called 
"style:page-usage" that specifies whether pages that have this page 
layout assigned, are always left pages, always right pages, or could be 
both. Master pages can be concatenated using the style:next-style-name 
attribute. To get an alternative sequence of left and right pages, one 
specifies a master page that uses left pages only and one that uses 
right pages only, and then concatenates them so that the 
style:next-style-name of the first one references the second one and 
vice versa.

This has influences on the way page breaks that start a new left or 
right page are specified. To specify such a page break, one has to 
assign a new master page to a paragraph that uses only left or right 
pages. That's done by the style:master-page-name attribute of the 
<style:style> element.

Best regards

Michael Brauer

OASIS Open Office TC chair

David A. Wheeler wrote:

> Section 14.5.23 says "The values odd-page and even-page
> are not supported"; you should delete that sentence.
> It's not at all unusual to require odd-page or even-page
> breaking.  For example, a user may want to set the
> style for a "chapter title" so that chapters only
> begin on odd-numbered pages.
> 
> Also, why are they mutually exclusive?  Indeed, it's not
> odd at all for some phrases (like "this page
> intentionally left blank") to be the only text for a page.
> I susggest deleting the text about them being mutually
> exclusive; they're not.
> 
> --- David A. Wheeler
>