DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32253] - Marker bugs

2004-12-07 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32253


[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED




--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-12-07 21:12 ---
Removed RetrieveMarkerLM. The LMs of the marker children are attached in the LM
tree as the direct children of the LM of the parent of the RetrieveMarker.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32253] - Marker bugs

2004-11-30 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32253





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-11-30 21:23 ---
Committed a fix in Marker, which cures the ClassCastException in
Marker.rebind(). Now all markers lead to a ClassCastException in
RetrieveMarkerLM.getNextKnuthElements(), line 81. This should be cured by
removing the LMs for fo:marker and for fo:retrieve-marker:

at the moment, RetrieveMarkerLM tries to achieve this (in the LM tree):

 ...
  |
   parentLM
  |
  RetrieveMarkerLM
  |
  InlineStackingLM
   ---+---
   | |
  chldLM1   chldLM2

but, as a marker can only have children which could replace its
retrieve-marker, wouldn't it be better to have just:

 ...
  |
   parentLM
   ---+---
   | |
  chldLM1   chldLM2

(Luca Furini at fop-dev)


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32253] - Marker bugs

2004-11-15 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32253





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-11-16 00:56 ---
Yes! I just *knew* there was a much more obvious way of testing that.

Thanks Glen (--still enjoying himself in Vegas, I presume?)


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32253] - Marker bugs

2004-11-15 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32253





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-11-16 00:45 ---
[Andreas]

>Then test:
>if( childNode.getClass().equals("class org.apache.fop.fo.FOText") )

Just using instanceof (i.e., childNode instanceof FOText) should be
sufficient--I implemented a similar change in fo.flow.Block when I switched text
nodes from FObj to FONode.

Thanks, (and sorry for the oversight--let me know if I can be of help here)
Glen

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32253] - Marker bugs

2004-11-15 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32253





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-11-15 22:59 ---
...due to the retrieved LM being an InlineStackingLM?? Where does that come 
from? Shouldn't that be a TextLM?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32253] - Marker bugs

2004-11-15 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32253





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-11-15 22:53 ---
...but this leads to yet another CCE, this time in 
  RetrieveMarkerLM.getNextKnuthElements() line 82


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32253] - Marker bugs

2004-11-15 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32253





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-11-15 22:44 ---
On second thought... simply using:

if( childNode.getName() == null )

seems even better to test whether it's an FObj.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32253] - Marker bugs

2004-11-15 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32253





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-11-15 22:38 ---
Thanks for the assist, Simon.

I noticed the problem in Marker.rebind() as well... and was wondering

Since:
1. all FObjs are also FONodes
2. FOText has its own bind() method

maybe we could cast i.next() to FONode first, to check the base class:
FONode childNode = (FONode) i.next();

Then test:
if( childNode.getClass().equals("class org.apache.fop.fo.FOText") )

And based upon the result of that test, cast to either FObj or FOText...

Sound like a good idea, or would this be classified as 'sloppy'?
(Alternative could be to try-and-catch the ClassCastException, but IIRC this is 
considered bad practice...)

BTW: stumbled upon the Joerg's favourite dreadful nested 'block-inline-block' 
problem --which throws ClassCastExceptions in InlineLayoutManager

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32253] - Marker bugs

2004-11-15 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32253





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-11-15 22:06 ---
I implemented InlineLevelLM in RetrieveMarkerLM. That cures some of the
ClassCast Exceptions. The exceptions in Marker.rebind are due to the recent
change of FOText from FObj to FONode. That change has not yet been made in this
method.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 32253] - Marker bugs

2004-11-15 Thread bugzilla 
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32253





--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2004-11-15 20:30 ---
Created an attachment (id=13470)
 --> (http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13470&action=view)
FO to demonstrate described problems


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.