Hi,
I agree that markers may be your best bet. For FOP 0.93 I know markers work in
PDF, and they do not work in RTF. I don't know about any other outputs. We
use markers for footnotes based on information in tables. You define the
static-content for your xsl-region-after with a retrieve-marker. Then each
time you have a reason for that footnote, just define your marker and it will
automatically be placed in the xsl-region-after. You can define the
retrieve-marker to be on single pages or to carryover and you blank out the
marker data when not needed. The trick may be if you have multiple footnotes,
you'll need to define multiple retrieve-markers or have a way of knowing you
need multiple "footnotes" in your single marker.
Phyllis
-----Original Message-----
From: Vincent Hennebert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 3:17 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Footnotes with shared bodies
Hi Andrea,
Andrea Aime a écrit :
> Hi,
> in one application I have the need to have multiple footnotes,
> all having the same inline element (say "(1)") refer the same
> body in the page footer area. Basically, this is a catalogue,
> and footnotes are used to provide extra informations. Many
> articles in the same page may have the same accessory information,
> that we want to write just once at the end of the page.
>
> The list is long, so the list may overflow on the next page,
> if so, the foot element will have to be repeated again.
>
> I don't think this is supported by xsl-fo, but I have would
> be happy to be proven wrong.
It seems that markers should do the trick (fo:marker,
fo:retrieve-table-marker), but having never played with them I can't say
for sure. Perhaps someone having some experience with them will be able
to help you.
> If not supported, how difficult would it be to alter FOP
> in order to support this requirement? Could you give me any
> hint/direction?
>
> Oh, the list of articles is in a table, so I would have to
> fix footnotes not working within a table too (I see there's
> an open bug with attached patches there, but for some reason
> it has been lingering for over an year...).
Hmmm, indeed. I'm just learning its existence :-\ Well, given the heavy
changes that are being performed in this area, I'm afraid it might
become unapplicable soon. A fix shouldn't be expected before... some time.
HTH,
Vincent
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
