Well, my fault. I didn't so much follow the whole whitespace discussion to know every detail. I assumed there was some kind of consensus by now.
On 16.11.2005 11:15:48 Chris Bowditch wrote: > Jeremias Maerki wrote: > > > Sounds like a good plan to me. Would you go after that? > > Jeremias: I have similar concerns to Manuel about this. Moving the > handleWhitespace method to a different class is probably okay, but I > don't think we should start making any major changes to Whitespace > handling until we have the design nailed down. It is still unclear > exactly what the spec intends in some places. Manuel has written a Wiki > which attempts to document the intention of the spec and presents some > ideas on how to implement this functionality. > > http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics-fop/LineLayout/WhitespaceHandling > > > > > On 15.11.2005 18:06:13 Andreas L Delmelle wrote: > > > >>In this respect: I still wonder whether it wouldn't be more > >>convenient to split up the whitespace handling, and deal with the > >>inlines separately. Currently, InlineCharIterator needs to generate > >>boundary characters to indicate start- or end-inline. If we would > >>deal with the whitespace of the inlines at inline-level itself, it > >>should become far more straightforward to apply the 'special' rules > >>(no removal of the first/last space of the inline, or before it). > >> > >>On top of that, it does away with the need to chain together all > >>FOText instances of a whole block (thus making that ugly static > >>'lastFOTextProcessed' obsolete?) > > Chris Jeremias Maerki
