Simon Pepping wrote: > Both markers are printed in blue. Perhaps it would be a > solution to clone the subtree below the marker to > retrieve-marker, and rebind that copy. That would be another > example of layout dependent data in the FO tree. If every
Just by way of clarification, this is no doubt de facto true in the current FOP HEAD code, but, depending on the design, IMO it is not a necessity. Peter West and I discussed this some, probably around August of 2003. I thought at the time that a GraftingPoint interface which lived in the FOTree could be used to handle this concept without disrupting the independence of the FOTree. I am now of the opinion that the solution may be even simpler. If you take the idea that the AreaTree is a "view" of the FOTree, so that Areas essentially inherit and/or derive traits from their generated-by FOTree nodes (instead of having bound values cached in them), then the solution may be as simple as using some redirects when static content is involved. This depends, in turn, on late binding (really, no binding) of the property values, which does not appear to be possible with the current FOP design. I am close to being able to demonstrate all of this within FOray, but I am not sure whether I will get it done in time for the upcoming 0.2 release, although it will have an independent FOTree. Victor Mote
