https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37579
--- Comment #64 from Vincent Hennebert <[email protected]> 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 the patch. This time another issue with a wrong order of > > > footnotes. There is a two column table in the attached example, both > > > columns > > > have footnotes. Sometimes the footnote from the second column precedes the > > > footnote from the first one. If you delete one block from the first > > > column, the > > > order will be right. > > > > It all depends on what order you should be expecting. If you scan the page > > in > > its whole width starting from the top you will find the footnote labeled 2 > > before the footnote labeled 1. This is basically what FOP is doing. > > > > Of course, it may seem more natural to start from the leftmost column, then > > go > > to the following one, etc. But this is particular to that case. With a > > right-to-left language it will be more natural to start from the rightmost > > column. Sometimes, the content will be such that the method above will be > > more > > natural. > > > > So this is a grey area, and the Recommendation doesn't say anything about > > that. > > Your best bet is to re-number the footnotes. Or use something else than > > footnotes (you may be happy with putting the notes in regular blocks just > > after > > the table, for example). > > > > HTH, > > Vincent > > Hi Vincent, > > I understand your point of view, you are probably right. Anyway, current > implementation is not very reliable. If you leave only two blocks in the left > column in my example, footnote labeled 1 will be output first, although, > according to FOP behavior, we can expect it should be footnote labeled 2. The change I made introduced another bug. It should be fixed now in revision 770635 ( https://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi?view=rev&rev=770635 ). Sorry about that. That said, I can think of certain situations involving row-spanning cells where the basic 'rule' stated above does no longer hold. I won't enter the details because they are a bit technical, but interesting issues may arise regarding accessibility, order of reading, etc. (That was a note to self :-) ) Vincent -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
