On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 01:59:07PM +0300, Andrejus Chaliapinas wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to understand why in Patrick's code, when he deals with Table > auto layout feature, after TableContentLayoutManager over current > TableLayoutManager is prepared and processed with required columns > shrinking/extra space distribution - there is another > TableContentLayoutManager creation (yes, this was already commeted by > Jeremias as no go approach)? Is it because something in Area Tree (some part > of its graph) needs to be reevaluated once more (due to changed column > width/columnMins/anything else)? > > If I comment second construction - then auto table layout testcase (yes > Manuel, that's why I was focused on them) fails due to incorrect IPDA value > for the first block presence in resulted area tree xml file.
I do not really know why Patrick created a second TableContentLM. His procedure constructs the Knuth elements twice. I suppose that he feared that this would have side effects, and that he tried to avoid those by doing the first evaluation in another TableContentLM. > Any help would be appreciated. I think it would be great if we could have > UML sequence diagram for those LM invocations/dependencies during some > general table processing. No UML diagrams for FOP available. Would be nice though. Regards, Simon -- Simon Pepping home page: http://www.leverkruid.eu