xmlgraphics-fop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bugzi...@apache.org
Subject DO NOT REPLY [Bug 47530] Problem with fo:wrapper inside block-container or table-cell
Date Wed, 15 Jul 2009 20:58:35 GMT

Andreas L. Delmelle <adelmelle@apache.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
          Component|fo tree                     |page-master/layout
           Platform|PC                          |All
            Version|0.94                        |1.0dev
            Summary|Problem with fo:wrapper     |Problem with fo:wrapper
                   |inside block-container      |inside block-container or
                   |                            |table-cell
         OS/Version|Windows XP                  |All

--- Comment #7 from Andreas L. Delmelle <adelmelle@apache.org>  2009-07-15 13:58:34
PST ---

I see... Checked and confirmed. The sample testcase fails validation in
fop-trunk, but that was easily fixed by removing the rowspan from the

After doing that, I get the ClassCastException too. Also occurs if you remove
the block-container from the picture. 
At any rate, I think the fix is even simpler. In that particular code-blocks,
there seems to be no reason whatsoever to use the BlockLevelLM interface and we
can simply declare the variables as plain LayoutManager. We can use a similar
check as is now made in FlowLM (in trunk), since the wrapper should definitely
not be ignored. If it only contains an empty block, it makes no difference, but
if the block has content, then that should be rendered normally.
The check should probably be factored into a separate method to avoid
unnecessary code-duplication. The fact that I had this fixed for FlowLM at some
point, and now the same issue still exists for two other BlockStackingLMs just
screams for improvement...

Thanks for reporting!

Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

View raw message