Hey gang, There are two issues I'd like to discuss. They come from feedback from customers:
The first concerns indent inheritance which I documented in [1]. It turns out that most commercial implementations decided to deliberately break indent inheritance to work around the expectations of inexperienced XSL-FO users. This obviously breaks the specification and it creates an interoperability issue. This becomes an issue, especially since I know a few companies that would like switch from commercial implementations back to Apache FOP now that it's "more usable" now. I've asked the XSL WG in [2] on their updated opinion about the issue. There are arguments in both directions. So what I'd like to do is implement the alternative behaviour as a configurable option in the FO tree. The default would still be what the specification describes (see [1]), but users would be able to set a switch that would make FOP reset start-indent and end-indent to zero in cases where in the area tree a reference area boundary would be crossed (block-containers and table-cell, mainly). [1] http://wiki.apache.org/xmlgraphics-fop/IndentInheritance [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xsl-editors/2005OctDec/0024.html The second issue is about the collapsing border model. Currently, having an fo:table with no explicit border-collapse="separate" results in a warning message in the log as well as frequent exceptions due to the fact that this border model not completely implemented. I would like to modify the FO tree in a way that a table always reports being in separate border model mode. The other idea would have been to change the default but I don't particularly like that approach because it breaks the spec. Obviously, this is only a temporary measure until the collapsing border model becomes usable. I was recently thinking about doing a scaled-down implementation which ignores the tricky interactions between headers/footers and the table-body. But my priorities here are not particularly high, so it might be some time until I get to this. Any objections? Comments? Thanks, Jeremias Maerki
