https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
Glenn Adams gad...@apache.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
--- Comment
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #66 from Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com 2012-04-07 01:41:24 UTC ---
resetting P2 open bugs to P3 pending further review
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
Glenn Adams gl...@skynav.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P3
--
Configure
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #65 from ToM tvtre...@nepatec.de 2011-01-10 10:02:33 EST ---
Footnotes are working now for tables and lists however i still experience that
bug when using table-header elements. (The body part doesn't show up at all).
Hope this
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
Jared Smith jaredsm...@jaredsmith.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #64 from Vincent Hennebert vhenneb...@gmail.com 2009-05-01
04:31:47 PST ---
Hi Dimitri,
(In reply to comment #63)
(In reply to comment #62)
Hi Dimitri,
(In reply to comment #61)
Hi Vincent,
thank you for
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #60 from Dimitri Goloborodko dv...@yahoo.com 2009-04-29 01:11:12
PST ---
Created an attachment (id=23561)
-- (https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23561)
Example of wrong order of footnotes against trunk
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #61 from Dimitri Goloborodko dv...@yahoo.com 2009-04-29 01:14:59
PST ---
Hi Vincent,
thank you for the patch. This time another issue with a wrong order of
footnotes. There is a two column table in the attached example,
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #62 from Vincent Hennebert vhenneb...@gmail.com 2009-04-29
03:55:03 PST ---
Hi Dimitri,
(In reply to comment #61)
Hi Vincent,
thank you for the patch. This time another issue with a wrong order of
footnotes. There is
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #63 from Dimitri Goloborodko dv...@yahoo.com 2009-04-29 06:55:22
PST ---
(In reply to comment #62)
Hi Dimitri,
(In reply to comment #61)
Hi Vincent,
thank you for the patch. This time another issue with a wrong
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
Vincent Hennebert vhenneb...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #23492|0 |1
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #58 from Vincent Hennebert vhenneb...@gmail.com 2009-04-15
11:01:31 PST ---
Hi Dimitri,
(In reply to comment #57)
snip/
I try to use the trunk 660979 and find a case, when a footnote defined in
table-body disappears.
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #56 from Dimitri Goloborodko dv...@yahoo.com 2009-04-14 03:30:40
PST ---
Created an attachment (id=23492)
-- (https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23492)
Example of lost footnote in table against trunk
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #57 from Dimitri Goloborodko dv...@yahoo.com 2009-04-14 03:33:19
PST ---
(In reply to comment #50)
(In reply to comment #49)
(In reply to comment #48)
AFAIU the reason why FootnoteBodyLM is re-parented is that it
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #55 from Vincent Hennebert vhenneb...@gmail.com 2009-03-02
02:59:40 PST ---
(In reply to comment #54)
I believe this bug is now fixed. Isn't it ?
No. Footnotes have not been implemented yet in table headers and
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #54 from Sylvestre Ledru sylvestre.le...@inria.fr 2009-02-27
07:18:47 PST ---
I believe this bug is now fixed. Isn't it ?
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
Ryan Lortie (desrt) [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
Johans Marvin Taboada Villca [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #52 from Johans Marvin Taboada Villca [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2008-06-08 14:44:42 PST ---
(In reply to comment #50)
I've been asked to look into this issue, so I committed a partial and
temporary
fix based on the latest
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #50 from Vincent Hennebert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-28 08:30:54
PST ---
(In reply to comment #49)
(In reply to comment #48)
AFAIU the reason why FootnoteBodyLM is re-parented is that it put its areas
at
the
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #51 from Vincent Hennebert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-28 08:48:08
PST ---
(In reply to comment #48)
(In reply to comment #27)
(In reply to comment #26)
At the point where getBaseLength() fails, the ancestor tree looks
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #49 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-27
14:01:26 PST ---
(In reply to comment #48)
AFAIU the reason why FootnoteBodyLM is re-parented is that it put its areas at
the right place (as children of the
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
Fyodor [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #45 from Vincent Hennebert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-19 02:52:15
PST ---
(In reply to comment #43)
Created an attachment (id=21977)
-- (https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21977) [details]
updated patch
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
Vincent Hennebert [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #21977|0 |1
is
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #47 from Vincent Hennebert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-19 02:58:37
PST ---
(In reply to comment #43)
Created an attachment (id=21977)
-- (https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21977) [details]
updated patch
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #40 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-17
03:04:03 PST ---
(In reply to comment #38)
An intermediate solution could probably be implemented the following way:
- in ActiveCell.Step, add a List field
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #41 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-17
13:05:46 PST ---
Created an attachment (id=21976)
-- (https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21976)
alternative patch for footnotes in table-cells
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #42 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-17
13:25:11 PST ---
(In reply to comment #41)
Created an attachment (id=21976)
-- (https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21976) [details]
alternative
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #21908|0 |1
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #44 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-17
16:19:07 PST ---
(In reply to comment #38)
(In reply to comment #37)
- from a high-level point of view first: list- and table-related code should
remain
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #34 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-16
06:16:07 PST ---
Update:
Adrian contacted me off-list to see if we could at least partially apply the
attached patches.
My proposal would be to integrate the
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #35 from Adrian Cumiskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-16 08:37:11
PST ---
I think this patch should only be applied when it is ready, looks like there is
still quite a bit of cleanup to do. Lets try and have a model that
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #36 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-16
09:23:54 PST ---
(In reply to comment #35)
I think this patch should only be applied when it is ready, looks like there
is
still quite a bit of cleanup to do.
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #37 from Vincent Hennebert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-16 10:16:00
PST ---
(In reply to comment #36)
(In reply to comment #35)
I think this patch should only be applied when it is ready, looks like
there is
still
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #38 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-16
11:29:36 PST ---
(In reply to comment #37)
I'm sorry to chime in so late, but so far I haven't had the time and energy to
approach this topic.
No problem.
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #39 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-16
11:37:29 PST ---
(In reply to comment #38)
snip /
Now that you mention it...
The current implementation has the related code (footnote gathering) in
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #32 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-14
00:27:45 PST ---
In the meantime, I also compared the behavior of the table-testcase with our
layout-test for footnote splits.
The one notable difference between
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #33 from Luca Furini [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-14 07:37:23 PST
---
(In reply to comment #32)
The footnote does not fit, not even one line, but the
table-footer cannot be moved (either completely or partially) to the
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #31 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-13
09:35:50 PST ---
Just had another look, and it seems to have been a fluke... :(
The infinite loop remains. Debugging it, I can almost 'see' what's going wrong,
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #29 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-12
01:52:36 PST ---
In the meantime, I managed to track down the point of origin for the infinite
loop. No solution yet, but it happens in
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
Adrian Cumiskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #30 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-12
13:45:00 PST ---
Good news: No idea why exactly, but I just tried again to reproduce the
infinite loop with the latest trunk, and couldn't. Maybe has something to
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #23 from Luca Furini [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-05 05:59:03 PST
---
Thank you for all your comments and additions, Andreas!
It's good to be back after quite a long time (enough to forget the good old
habit of using JUnit!)
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #24 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-05
07:15:17 PST ---
(In reply to comment #23)
Thank you for all your comments and additions, Andreas!
It's good to be back after quite a long time (enough to forget
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #25 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-05
09:16:07 PST ---
(In reply to comment #24)
...
It is only that percentage which causes the error. For 'normal'
list-item-label
descendants, the base-length is
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #26 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-05
09:41:40 PST ---
(In reply to comment #25)
Did some further research, and the ancestor tree for both footnotes' LMs
(label
and body) looks like:
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #27 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-05
10:02:04 PST ---
(In reply to comment #26)
Strike that... Stopped debugging too early. The label's LM does appear if I
leave it running...
At the point where
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #28 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-05
10:42:16 PST ---
Created an attachment (id=21922)
-- (https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21922)
Patch for FootnoteBodyLayoutManager
Naively
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
Luca Furini [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #17432|0 |1
is
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #16 from Luca Furini [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-02 08:07:37 PST
---
I'm attaching an updated patch, that can be applied to the trunk as it is now.
It basically does the same thing as the old one, just in a slightly
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #17 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-02
09:27:37 PST ---
(In reply to comment #16)
I'm attaching an updated patch, that can be applied to the trunk as it is now.
Thanks! Good to see you back in action
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #18 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-02
10:21:09 PST ---
Just ran the layoutengine test-suite after having applied the patch, and it
seems this causes quite a few tests to break. One of the reasons is an
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #19 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-02
12:48:50 PST ---
(In reply to comment #18)
Just ran the layoutengine test-suite after having applied the patch, and it
seems this causes quite a few tests to
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #21907|0 |1
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #21 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-02
13:49:08 PST ---
Further investigation into the ordering of footnotes for table-header and
table-footer revealed that they are added to the first/last page in case
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #22 from Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-02
13:57:33 PST ---
(In reply to comment #21)
The problem with getLengthBase() seems to point to a difficulty with
property-inheritance: strictly speaking, the
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
Ron Van den Branden [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
66 matches
Mail list logo
