Sorry, Luca. My bad. The test should have been on the flow, not in the
footnote area. I've corrected it in CVS.

Right now, that last empty block creates a block area that has a BPD of
14400. In the end this area should collapse to a BPD of 0 so it doesn't
affect the page breaking. A footnote like this is a regular work-around
in 0.20.5 and we should have it working again. Or maybe it's just a
matter of getting linestacking-strategy right. I haven't investigated
much, yet. At any rate, this pattern is used to emulate
page-position="last". You would agree that an empty block should
collapse to a zero BPD, wouldn't you?

I hope this answers your question.

On 31.05.2005 18:13:25 Luca Furini wrote:
> I'm trying to correct the footnotes handling, as the testfile
> footnotes2.xml does not pass yet.
> 
> I succeeded in handling a page-dependent footnote separator, with the
> reasonable (at least IMO) assumption that the separator bpd does not
> change, but there is a check I don't understand:
> 
>     [...]
>     <!-- last block on page 3 -->
>     <eval expected="360000" 
> xpath="//pageViewport[3]/page/regionViewport/regionBody/footnote/block[last()]/@ipd"/>
>     <eval expected="0" 
> xpath="//pageViewport[3]/page/regionViewport/regionBody/footnote/block[last()]/@bpd"/>
>     [...]
> 
> Why should the last footnote block have bpd = 0?
> 
> Regards
>     Luca
> 
> 



Jeremias Maerki

Reply via email to