Jeremias Maerki wrote:

The first concerns indent inheritance [...]

So what I'd like to do is implement the alternative behaviour as a configurable option in the FO tree. The default would still be what the specification describes (see [1]), but users would be able to set a switch that would make FOP reset start-indent and end-indent to zero in cases where in the area tree a reference area boundary would be crossed (block-containers and table-cell, mainly).

I agree with the need to provide users what they expect, but I did not understand where this switch will be: in the configuration file (+1) or in the document itself as an extension property / element (not so enthusiastic about that)?

In the first case the file would be correct, only its rendering will be "deliberately wrong": the user is aware that he is requiring a non-standard rendering *to the formatter*.

In the second the document itself would require a non-standard rendering, which only our implementation will provide; in other words, it seems to me that this solution would give the impression that the file itself is enough to achieve the expected result, while it is not.

Or maybe you were thinking of something else?

The second issue is about the collapsing border model. Currently, having an fo:table with no explicit border-collapse="separate" results in a warning message in the log as well as frequent exceptions due to the fact that this border model not completely implemented. I would like to modify the FO tree in a way that a table always reports being in separate border model mode. The other idea would have been to change the default but I don't particularly like that approach because it breaks the spec. Obviously, this is only a temporary measure until the collapsing border model becomes usable.

I agree with you, I prefer the first option.


Reply via email to