[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2402?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Andreas L. Delmelle updated FOP-2402:
-------------------------------------
Attachment: FOP-2402.pdf
I may have some good news... On my end, it renders as in attach.
The only potential issue I still see is that the superscript footnote label on
the second page is clipped, but that is due to the
"line-height-shift-adjustment" specified on the root. If you remove that, then
the result looks slightly better.
Now, the reason this appears 'fixed' on my end, is because I locally have the
changes for proper orphans and widows handling incorporated in my local copy.
Can you try to apply the patch attached to FOP-1488 to confirm?
Note - Just confirmed that this would still pose a problem if the user forces
widows and orphans to 1, which would trigger the behaviour of current trunk.
For the case as attached, default values of 2 for each of the properties should
be respected, which FOP 2.1 does not yet properly implement.
Also note that just removing the "line-height-shift-adjustment" appears to
trigger another bug, where some content is dropped, i.e. the second page
appears blank...?
> footnotes overlap regular content
> ---------------------------------
>
> Key: FOP-2402
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2402
> Project: FOP
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: layout/block
> Affects Versions: trunk
> Environment: Ubuntu 14.04, Java 1.7.0_55
> Reporter: Alexey Neyman
> Attachments: FOP-2402.pdf, bad.fo, bad.pdf
>
>
> We've noticed yet another issue with the rendering of the footnotes where the
> footnote is rendered over the regular content. Verified with top-of-trunk
> FOP, r1615966. Please refer to the attached FO/PDF files.
>
> Curiously, if the last fo:list-item is commented out, the preceding
> fo:list-items are placed more tightly and as a result, the footnotes do not
> overlap with the regular content. This suggests that there's a bug in how the
> space between blocks is calculated, but I haven't debugged it further yet.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
