Re: Table troubles

2007-02-14 Thread Jeremias Maerki
On 13.02.2007 13:40:53 Andreas L Delmelle wrote: On Feb 12, 2007, at 23:34, Jeremias Maerki wrote: snip / I'd very much like to agree with your solution/interpretation, but the nit in me feels compelled to ask: 100% of what? XSL 1.1 says for percentages in

Re: Table troubles

2007-02-14 Thread Chris Bowditch
Vincent Hennebert wrote: Chris Bowditch a écrit : Andreas L Delmelle wrote: snip/ The Rec in all its glory! :) I wonder what this means for tables that don't have a block-container parent. Note that, since a block's b-p-d can't be specified, that leaves only block-container as a possible

Re: Table troubles

2007-02-13 Thread Andreas L Delmelle
On Feb 12, 2007, at 23:34, Jeremias Maerki wrote: snip / I'd very much like to agree with your solution/interpretation, but the nit in me feels compelled to ask: 100% of what? XSL 1.1 says for percentages in block-progression-dimension: The percentage is calculated with respect to the

Re: Table troubles

2007-02-13 Thread Chris Bowditch
Andreas L Delmelle wrote: snip/ The Rec in all its glory! :) I wonder what this means for tables that don't have a block-container parent. Note that, since a block's b-p-d can't be specified, that leaves only block-container as a possible and reliable base 'block- level FO that generates

Re: Table troubles

2007-02-13 Thread Andreas L Delmelle
On Feb 13, 2007, at 15:06, Chris Bowditch wrote: Andreas L Delmelle wrote: snip/ The Rec in all its glory! :) I wonder what this means for tables that don't have a block- container parent. Note that, since a block's b-p-d can't be specified, that leaves only block-container as a

Re: Table troubles

2007-02-13 Thread Vincent Hennebert
Chris Bowditch a écrit : Andreas L Delmelle wrote: snip/ The Rec in all its glory! :) I wonder what this means for tables that don't have a block-container parent. Note that, since a block's b-p-d can't be specified, that leaves only block-container as a possible and reliable base

Re: Table troubles

2007-02-12 Thread Vincenzo Mazzeo
Moreover I have some cells with the 'display-align' attribute set to 'after'. Because of I can't use the 'keep-together' attribute on rows, it happens that if a row is shared on two pages the 'display-align' doesn't work and the value appears on the former page instead of the latter. This

Re: Table troubles

2007-02-12 Thread Vincent Hennebert
Hi Vincenzo, Vincenzo Mazzeo a écrit : Moreover I have some cells with the 'display-align' attribute set to 'after'. Because of I can't use the 'keep-together' attribute on rows, it happens that if a row is shared on two pages the 'display-align' doesn't work and the value appears on the

Re: Table troubles

2007-02-12 Thread Vincenzo Mazzeo
It seems there is no bug open on bugzilla. I put a new entry (41592). Regards Vincenzo Vincent Hennebert ha scritto: Hi Vincenzo, Vincenzo Mazzeo a écrit : Moreover I have some cells with the 'display-align' attribute set to 'after'. Because of I can't use the 'keep-together' attribute on

Re: Table troubles

2007-02-12 Thread Jeremias Maerki
On 09.02.2007 18:43:40 Andreas L Delmelle wrote: On Feb 9, 2007, at 18:22, Jeremias Maerki wrote: An extension isn't necessary. This can be expressed with normal FO means: Specify block-progression-dimension.optimum=100% and block-progression-dimension.minimum=0pt on the last

Table troubles

2007-02-09 Thread Vincenzo Mazzeo
Hi all, I have upgraded fop from 0.25 to 0.93 and I have some troubles with tables. 1. On page break table doesn't have the bottom border even if I set it. 2. On the last page, if there isn't enough data, table doesn't fill all available space even if I set the 'height' attribute to 100%.

RE: Table troubles

2007-02-09 Thread Gregan, Miroslav
Hi, Could you send the XSL:FO file, it's quite hard to answer you without. Thanks Miro -Original Message- From: Vincenzo Mazzeo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 4:09 PM To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Subject: Table troubles Hi all, I have upgraded fop

Re: Table troubles

2007-02-09 Thread Vincenzo Mazzeo
:09 PM To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Subject: Table troubles Hi all, I have upgraded fop from 0.25 to 0.93 and I have some troubles with tables. 1. On page break table doesn't have the bottom border even if I set it. 2. On the last page, if there isn't enough data, table doesn't fill all

Re: Table troubles

2007-02-09 Thread Vincenzo Mazzeo
Chris Bowditch ha scritto: Vincenzo Mazzeo wrote: Hi all, I have upgraded fop from 0.25 to 0.93 and I have some troubles with tables. 1. On page break table doesn't have the bottom border even if I set it. This is because of border conditionality. Table borders are not painted at the

Re: Table troubles

2007-02-09 Thread Chris Bowditch
Vincenzo Mazzeo wrote: Chris Bowditch ha scritto: Vincenzo Mazzeo wrote: Hi all, I have upgraded fop from 0.25 to 0.93 and I have some troubles with tables. 1. On page break table doesn't have the bottom border even if I set it. This is because of border conditionality. Table borders

Re: Table troubles

2007-02-09 Thread Andreas L Delmelle
On Feb 9, 2007, at 18:43, Andreas L Delmelle wrote: On Feb 9, 2007, at 18:22, Jeremias Maerki wrote: An extension isn't necessary. This can be expressed with normal FO means: Specify block-progression-dimension.optimum=100% and block-progression-dimension.minimum=0pt on the last table-row.