Begin forwarded message:

From: Andreas Delmelle <andreas.delme...@telenet.be>

On 25 Aug 2009, at 12:22, Vincent Hennebert wrote:


Keeps do /not/ apply to fo:table-cell:
http://www.w3.org/TR/xsl11/#fo_table-cell
<snip />
So whatever that warning means, it is not related to tables.

OK, so I guess it's just a coincidence that the warning appears only in table-related tests...

Must have misread the log output here. Apparently, they come from 'some' other testcase(s). I guess this will be looked into as soon as I or anyone else feel(s) like it... If they were routed via the event- handling system, we would at least see in which of the 480 tests it occurs.

At any rate, this remark made we wonder why we even have a getKeepWithPrevious() and getKeepWithNext() in TableCellLM... Just tried relying on the superclass implementation. If the method would be called, it should ultimately throw an IllegalStateException, since getKeepTogetherProperty() is not implemented for BlockStackingLM.

So, I ran the jUnit tests after that change, and got no indication of issues whatsoever, which means that those methods on TableCellLM are actually never called at runtime. Maybe they had better be removed. I don't see why there is a 'TODO: Fix me...' in both methods. After all, how should we interpret keep-with-previous or keep-with-next in that context anyway? keep-together makes sense, even though it does not apply to table-cell.


Later

Andreas

Andreas Delmelle
mailto:andreas.delmelle.AT.telenet.be
jabber: mandr...@jabber.org
skype: adlm0608

---

Reply via email to