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

Reply via email to