It seems although it does happen.. there are some work arounds this.

1) Setting line height and height to 0mm this includes that of any inline
objects however within inline objects the content height does not effect 

2) the location of any parent for-each statement. if specified within the
table body the error occurs, if specified within a block all works ok.

I shall continue to try and diagnose where errors occur. Maybe if I can find
the cause somebody can modify to fix. Unfortunately I am by no means
competent to look at code to do the same. 


Carlos Villegas wrote:
> It probably behaves that way. I wasn't sure about the implementation. It 
> was enough for my purposes so I didn't checked it further.
> Cheers
> On 9/21/11 6:16 PM, champagne_chary wrote:
>> Would I be right in assuming that this method removes the header however
>> places a space at the bottom of the page. This is unfortunately what i am
>> finding. :(...  The space at the bottom of the parent object (be it a 
>> page/
>> table row) is  equivelent in height to that the header / more
>> specifically
>> the text within.
>> I have tried to implement in a couple of ways and this phenominum keeps
>> occuring. Hope somebody that uses this nifty mod can enlighten me on if
>> there is a way around this.
>> Cheers
>> Carlos Villegas wrote:
>>> I implemented this extension. I added fox:table-omit-last-footer and
>>> fox:table-omit-first-header attributes to fo:table. It seems to work
>>> well in my use case.
>>> If anyone is interested I can submit a patch.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Carlos
>>> Carlos Villegas wrote:
>>>> Thanks for the pointers. I agree that implementing
>>>> retrieve-table-marker
>>>> is not only a more generic solution but also what the spec requires.
>>>> However, I'm short on time and this seems easier so I'll give it a try
>>>> first.
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Carlos
>>>> Vincent Hennebert wrote:
>>>>> Hi Carlos,
>>>>> Carlos Villegas wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> I searched the mailing lists and it seems that although some people
>>>>>> had
>>>>>> worked at several times at trying to implement retrieve-table-marker,
>>>>>> it's not yet done. Is somebody working on this? What's the status?
>>>>> It’s not being worked on at the moment. This is still a missing
>>>>> feature.
>>>>>> In many use cases omitting the first table header and the last table
>>>>>> footer will do the trick.
>>>>>> How easy is this to implement?
>>>>>> What will be the steps to add such an extension to FOP?
>>>>>> I just started looking at the code so I'm exploring whether this is
>>>>>> viable solution.
>>>>> That might work. You would need to change the
>>>>> o.a.f.layoutmgr.table.TableContentLayoutManager.getNextKnuthElements
>>>>> method. There is a “if (getTableLM().getTable().omitHeaderAtBreak())”
>>>>> test that you could augment with a “&&  !(omitFirstHeader)” clause.
>>>>> Likewise for the footer.
>>>>> The easiest is to directly modify that class and re-build FOP. A bit
>>>>> less easy would be to add a variable in the configuration file, so
>>>>> that
>>>>> you can enable it only for certain FO files. Even less easy would be
>>>>> to
>>>>> add an extension property to fo:table so that you can enable it only
>>>>> for
>>>>> some tables of an FO document. Please ask if you need more details.
>>>>> All that said, such a change would be very hacky and, unless there is
>>>>> overwhelming demand from the user community, I would oppose to
>>>>> integrate
>>>>> it in the code base. This is a patch that you would have to maintain
>>>>> on
>>>>> your side. Better would be of course to actually implement
>>>>> retrieve-table-marker. Although this would be more involving than
>>>>> implementing this little trick...
>>>>> HTH,
>>>>> Vincent

View this message in context:
Sent from the FOP - Dev mailing list archive at

Reply via email to