DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUGĀ·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38244>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED ANDĀ·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38244





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-01-31 21:26 -------
Finaly I would say, that my point of view is not better than the current
implementation. So i would propose to document the decision in the source of
fo/flow/Table.java to prevent others to go the same route (based on rec 7.26.12
"number-columns-repeated") before they recognize that there is a inconsistency
with 7.26.8 "column-number".

Something like this (feel free to alter or shorten)

if (colRepeat > 1) {
//in case column is repeated:
...
//there is an inconsistency for the column-number of table-column in the w3c
xml-fo rec between 
//7.26.8 "column-number": column-number of previous table-column + 1 
//and 7.26.12 "number-columns-repeated": column-number = previous +
number-columns-spanned
//fop developers decided to implement the behavour of 7.27.8
//see discussion on fop-dev mailing-list in 01/2006


After inserting something like that it is ok for me to close the bug.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

Reply via email to