On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 10:13 pm, Jeremias Maerki wrote: > It's a "NYI" problem. So far only the fixed table layout is > implemented. The spec says to fall back to the automatic table layout > when the inline-progression-dimension is auto. FOP can't do that, > yet, so it simply chooses an available value which is 100% in this > case. > > This is also a point where "hero" points can earned. :-) > Thanks for the generous offer :-). Luckily I am not in this for the glory => not tempting right at the moment.
May be fop should spit out a warning that it uses this non-standard fallback? > On 28.08.2005 15:57:37 Manuel Mall wrote: > > This is just a clarification question to those in the know. > > > > In HTML when specifying a table browsers usually choose the > > smallest width without causing unforced breaks in columns. That is > > in XSL-FO terms the ipd of the table can be smaller than the > > containing block. In the current fop version it appears as if the > > table width is always forced to the width of the containing block, > > i.e. it behaves like setting width="100%" in HTML on the table. I > > compared this to XEP and it renders more like HTML. > > > > Is this a feature, a bug, a not yet implemented, or do I > > misunderstand something? > > > > Manuel > > Jeremias Maerki Manuel