On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 04:57 pm, Jeremias Maerki wrote: > On 21.09.2005 09:52:00 Manuel Mall wrote: > > On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 02:50 pm, Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > <snip/> > > > > > Jeremias, can you explain to me why we have to reevaluate? > > Let me explain by showing the flow of events for a simple block with > a long text in it: > <snip/>
> It's not that immediate as the LineLM has to do the line breaking > before the page breaking can be done. Ok, I see we do all the line breaking first followed by the page breaking therefore the Line LM when creating a break as no idea that this may or may not become a page break and "happily" continues line breaking with the given ipd. > > > Yes, the question on the > > new IPD when ask of a LM may have to "ripple up" the LM chain until > > we get to a LM which can actually answer it. But is that > > conceptually flawed? > > It doesn't work that way with the Knuth approach. Yes, I see because we use a two pass approach line breaking and page breaking use different set of Knuth elements. > > HTH > Yes it did, thanks. > Jeremias Maerki Manuel
