xmlgraphics-fop-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Bowditch <bowditch_ch...@hotmail.com>
Subject Re: fop-0.93. error when missing fo:table-cell column-number and number-rows-spanned used in the same fo:table
Date Tue, 30 Jan 2007 16:39:15 GMT
LEVRERO, Guillaume wrote:

> Hi Chris,
> Thanks for the quick reply. I will raise the bug in bugzilla.
> Also0 where do you see the FO being invalid ? Are you referring to the missing <fo:table-cell
colum-number="2"> ?
> If so, I could not find anywhere in the XSL-FO 1.0 recommendation, that you must specify
every table-cell in a row, if column-number and fo:table-column are defined. Could you point
me to the part of the XSL-FO 1.0 recommendation that specifies this.

You don't need to specify a table-cell for every column. The reason I 
said your FO is invalid is because your first row attempts to place a 
cell on column 4, but you have defined only 3 columns in the table. So 
whilst you don't need a table-cell for every column, it is necessary to 
have a column for every cell (this is true for table-layout="fixed" 
which is the only layout supported by FOP)! I hope that isn't too cryptic!

> The sample I send is producing the expected PDF in Fop-0.92 ? 
> Fop-0.92 and Fop-0.93 don't seems to see this FO the same way.

As I indicated in my previous post. There have been a couple of changes 
  to Table Layout between 0.92 and 0.93.

> Fop-092 -> FO is valid

0.92 should have flagged this as an error too. You have placed a cell on 
column 4 when only 3 columns are defined.

> Fop-093 -> Should raise an FO validation error.
> Which one is right ?
> Thanks again for your help.



To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org

View raw message