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=40308>. 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=40308 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-08-24 12:04 ------- (In reply to comment #1) > If there are duplicate IDs in the XML and/or XSL then FOP doesnt care, but if > they make it through to the generated XSL-FO then the XSL-FO is illegal > because FOP will have no way of evaluating things like: > > 1) Basic Links that reference specific IDs > 2) Page Citations that reference specific IDs. > > So this is not a benign error as you suggest. I'm sorry but I don't agree. I've tested that with my trivial patch. Instead of stopping its work abruptly, FOP works as expected by the user: it does its best efforts to output a usable PDF. 1) Basic Link points to the first occurrence of the multiply defined ID. 2) Page Citation contains the page number of the first occurrence of the multiply defined ID. I hate to say this to a developer because it generally upsets her/him, but the other XSL-FO formatters that I know do not stop doing their job simply because they have found multiply defined IDs in the XSL-FO document. I understand that you find my request terribly unclean, but please believe me, formatting modern, modular, perfectly sane, XML documents will often mean having to cope with illegal XSL-FOs due to multiply defined IDs. In all cases, thank you very much for your fine work on FOP 0.92beta. What a difference in quality with its previous incarnation (0.20.5)! -- 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.