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

[W. Eliot Kimber]

David Tolpin wrote:
>>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>>--------------040603050105060408030106
>>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".

Cheers,

E.
-- 
W. Eliot Kimber, eliot at isogen.com
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 http://www.renderx.com/tos.html