You’re both right of course. I didn’t have that possibility in mind when
writing my post to fop-dev. No warning needed indeed :-)
> Andreas Delmelle wrote:
>> The only modification would be:
>> * surrounding the method body of
>> ColumnNumberPropertyMaker.make(PropertyList, String, FObj) with a
>> check for the type of FO for which the property is being constructed.
>> If that isn't a table-cell or a table-column, then we /silently/
>> ignore it (after all, it's always possible that the value is referred
>> to further down the stream)
>> * if it is not a table-cell or table-column, return a zero value to
>> avoid the property subsystem calling make(PropertyList) to construct a
>> default/initial value
That’s not so simple IMO. column-number must be assigned its specified
value even when the object isn’t a table-cell nor a table-column.
Simply, no check for column availability must be performed.
Vincent Hennebert Anyware Technologies
Apache FOP Committer FOP Development/Consulting