DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39777>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39777 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-24 20:21 ------- This is a good piece of work. A few remarks: 1. Copyright year on new classes should be only 2006. 2. Wiki page: The argument for an inner class in bullet 3 only refers to an object inner class. Therefore contradicts bullet 4, a static inner class, and is invalid. 3. fo:float seems to be the only FO that can be placed in inline and block content. This causes a problem because FOP distinguishes between inline and block LMs rather much. I do not think that this problem needs to be solved in this project. It should be fine to make an implementation which works for inline fo:float FOs. 4. Infos is not correct english; better call it ProgressInfo. cumulatedLengths is better changed to cumulativeLengths. 5. The implementation does not use the max and min property of the BPD of a float. In a text with little stretch and shrink, e.g. an adapted version of the test file footnote_basic.xml, there is no possibility to place the floats with less than infinite badness, and they are moved towards the end of the page sequence. 6. The OutOfLineRecord.getFootnoteSplit and OutOfLineRecord.getFloatSplit methods suggest that there is room for two subclasses. It would be nice if the two conditional blocks in PageBreakingAlgorithm.computeDifference, if (floats.existing()) and if (footnotes.existing()) could be merged, and the difference in the logic be moved to the footnotes and floats objects. But that is finishing touch. -- 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.
