> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas L Delmelle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
> On Aug 8, 2006, at 22:27, Zaleski, Matthew (M.E.) wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 

Thanks for the reply.


> > One feature that seems to be still under development is the 
> > keep-with-next / keep-with-previous attributes.  From the 
> conformance 
> > table on the FOP website it wasn't clear if those 
> attributes works on
> > *any* of the table features.  Is that a correct conclusion?
> 
> Not entirely. From what I could dig up in the archives, 
> keep-together and keep-with-next should work on table 
> nodes... It's only keep-with- previous that has the mentioned 
> restriction.

I'm having problems with keep-with-next attribute on <fo:table-row>.
It's triggering "java.lang.RuntimeException: Some content could not fit
into a line/page after 50 attempts. Giving up to avoid an endless loop."
that I don't think I should be getting as each table is small enough.
> 
> > Is there a work-around to hold a table together and not get broken 
> > across pages?
> 
> See above. Chances are you may not need a workaround.
> 
> At any rate: if you're using the table only as the 0.20.5 
> workaround for keep-together, then you might consider 
> switching to a block structure.
> 

Yes, I do have plenty of workaround <fo:table> entries in my XSL
templates.  However, I truly am designing a series of tables anyways so
it's not like I didn't need table elements.  There is still a fair
amount of nesting of tables to achieve my current layout.  I really need
the table column attribute text-align="<string>" but that hasn't been
implemented in any of the FOP versions to date (understandably so as
that has to be pretty difficult to implement).  So I make do with tables
within my cells to do pseudo text-align for my columns of numbers
containing decimal points.  I also have a "wrapper" table around my
tables to attach a table caption as well as (more importantly) some
additional formatting of a variable number of summary tables that need
to be attached to what a normal person would call a table.

I tried putting keep-together="always" on my top-level <fo:table>
elements and I got the same failure as with keep-with-next attributes on
<fo:table-row>.  Without the "keep-*" attributes, the PDF gets generated
and it is obvious that each table is small enough to fit.  I had been
using keep-with-previous="<number>" with 0.20.5 to better control page
breaks when a table got too big for a page.

I'm now wondering if changing the "attempt limit" to something higher
than 50 would solve my problem.  The number of nested tables may be
impacting the break detection code.  Now I just need to figure out if I
can change that limit of 50 via some Java method.

--Matthew Zaleski

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to