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/page/regionViewport/regionBody/footnote/block[last()]/@ipd"/> > <eval expected="0" > xpath="//pageViewport/page/regionViewport/regionBody/footnote/block[last()]/@bpd"/> > [...] > > Why should the last footnote block have bpd = 0? > > Regards > Luca > > Jeremias Maerki