On Aug 3, 2007, at 12:13, Chris Bowditch wrote:
Vincent Hennebert wrote:
Hi,
I’m suddenly all confused about the supposedly expected behaviour
of breaks. Please have a look at the attached FO file and its PDF
result.
We get 2 pages. The break-before on the outer block and the inner
block are “merged” into just one... Why?
Well I can't explain it from a spec point of view. However, the
current behaviour is what the users would expect. In my mind there
is no business scenario where a page would contain just the top
border of a block and nothing more. And if there was such a use
case then there are far more straight forward ways of reaching such
an affect, namely:
<fo:block border-top="solid 1pt black" break-after="page"> </
fo:block>
Right. Another possible alternative is the slightly longer (I think,
haven't tried):
<fo:block border-top="solid 1pt black" break-after="page" white-space-
treatment="preserve"> </fo:block>
and this example, IMO, shows that the current behaviour is correct.
With default white-space- and linefeed-treatment, I would assume
there is no 'empty area' before the inner block's first area, so the
inner block is still leading on the second page.
Note that empty blocks by themselves, for example, also do not
generate empty lines. Putting a thousand empty fo:blocks in sequence
will accomplish exactly nothing. You need at least one preserved
white-space character to achieve a 'displacement' effect in block-
progression-direction.
If the breaks are also merged in case of preserved linefeeds and or
spaces, then FOP would be in error.
Cheers
Andreas
