Well, this might have been a bit premature. The change necessary actually fixed a bug in AbstractRenderer, but still it might be worth discussing the point.
On 04.02.2005 15:51:58 Jeremias Maerki wrote: > Team, > > Chapter 4.2.2 Common Traits defines four traits (top-position, > bottom-position, left-position, right-position) which describes the > placement of areas within the nearest ancestor reference-area (or the > page-viewport-area). We don't use these trait but recreate the placement > of individual areas in the renderer (actually and effectively in each > (!) renderer). I wondered a few times during the last month if we should > have the layout manager handle the calculation of the coordinates. This > has a few advantages: > - All layout is really in the layout managers. > - Each renderer really only paints the areas in the place it is told to. > > The obvious disadvantage is the effort needed to write the code that > generates these traits in all layout managers. > > The reason I'm bringing this up now is my attempt to implement table row > backgrounds where I don't manage to place the background areas in the > right places due to placement logic in the renderer(s). Of course, there > are work-arounds and I only have to fix AbstractRenderer in this case > but it doesn't feel right. There's already enough placement logic in the > PDFRenderer which needs to be duplicated in all other renderers. I can > also remember the synchronization effort when I wrote the original > PSRenderer. > > I think it would also simplify the renderers itself, making it easier to > develop a new one, if we started using left-position and top-position > traits. The other two may be necessary as soon as there's more effort > towards implementing writing-modes. > > Keiron responded to a similar question in 2002: > http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&by=thread&from=214823 > > I don't share his opinion on point 3 because whenever we have a change > in reference-orientation we also have a new reference-area which > establishes a new coordinate system. So I don't think it will be > complicated to calculate the right coordinates. But I may be wrong. > > Opinions? Jeremias Maerki