https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53573
--- Comment #14 from Glenn Adams gad...@apache.org ---
(In reply to comment #13)
(In reply to comment #10)
(In reply to comment #6)
The first 3 lines of generated PDF from you give a near correct look.
The problem is at character
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53573
--- Comment #15 from na...@th.ibm.com ---
(In reply to comment #14)
(In reply to comment #13)
(In reply to comment #10)
(In reply to comment #6)
The first 3 lines of generated PDF from you give a near correct look.
The problem
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51962
Pascal Sancho psancho@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|pascal.san...@takoma.fr |
--
You are
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48764
Pascal Sancho psancho@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
---
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53586
Priority: P2
Bug ID: 53586
Assignee: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Summary: NPE being thrown when hyphenation is used
Severity: normal
Classification: Unclassified
Glenn,
Is it worth porting these javadoc amendments to the 1.1 branch? I don't
mind doing it if you'd like them in 1.1.
Mehdi
On 23 July 2012 11:21, me...@apache.org wrote:
Author: mehdi
Date: Mon Jul 23 10:21:23 2012
New Revision: 1364567
URL:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48765
Pascal Sancho psancho@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53586
Pascal Sancho psancho@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53580
Matthias Reischenbacher matthias8...@gmx.at changed:
What|Removed |Added
OS||All
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53580
Matthias Reischenbacher matthias8...@gmx.at changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #29092|0 |1
Hello,
I seen that the latest version of the FOP is 1.1rc. Taking in consideration
that is an release candidate. Do you have any information when will be next
stable release after 1.1rc?
Thank you,
Danut Clapa
Senior Java Developer
TIC
Phone 0314138592
danut.cl...@uti.ro
Sos. Oltenitei, nr
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53580
--- Comment #2 from Alex Giotis alex.gio...@gmail.com ---
I have not used it, but RenderX seems to support it too. See footnote [1] in
XEP User Guide - Appendix A. XSL-FO Conformance
[1] http://www.renderx.com/reference.html#ftn.d0e11055
On 23/07/2012 14:59, Danut Clapa wrote:
Hello,
Hi Danut,
I seen that the latest version of the FOP is 1.1rc. Taking in consideration
that is an release candidate. Do you have any information when will be next
stable release after 1.1rc?
You don't need to cross post your question to
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53573
--- Comment #16 from Glenn Adams gad...@apache.org ---
(In reply to comment #15)
(In reply to comment #14)
(In reply to comment #13)
(In reply to comment #10)
(In reply to comment #6)
The first 3 lines of generated PDF from
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51962
Matthias Reischenbacher matthias8...@gmx.at changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|CLOSED
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53580
--- Comment #3 from Matthias Reischenbacher matthias8...@gmx.at ---
Alex, thanks for the pointer. I went with the AntennaHouse approach because it
also takes into account the number of pages of the page-sequence and not only
the total
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53580
--- Comment #4 from Matthias Reischenbacher matthias8...@gmx.at ---
Created attachment 29101
-- https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29101action=edit
Patch
New patch which implements the following two force-page-count
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53580
Matthias Reischenbacher matthias8...@gmx.at changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[PATCH] force-page-count
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53573
--- Comment #17 from na...@th.ibm.com ---
Created attachment 29102
-- https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29102action=edit
The debug mode output from fop.bat
The result of using fop.bat execution is the same as
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53573
--- Comment #18 from Glenn Adams gad...@apache.org ---
(In reply to comment #17)
Created attachment 29102 [details]
The debug mode output from fop.bat
The result of using fop.bat execution is the same as previously upload PDF
file.
I
20 matches
Mail list logo