https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52287
Chris Bowditch <bowditch_ch...@hotmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OS/Version| |All
--- Comment #2 from Chris Bowditch <bowditch_ch...@hotmail.com> 2012-01-18
15:23:44 UTC ---
Hi Matthias,
I've taken a look at your test case and I don't think it is a good test case
for fox:widow-content-limit and fox:orphan-content-limit. That's because
there's only 2 list items. To honour the 2em limits both items must be kept
together.
If I alter the test case so that there are several items in column 1 that
naturally flows 1 item onto column 2 then the fox:widow-content-limit extension
is demo'd more readily. The last item from column 1 is then moved to column 2
to honour the widow limit. If I then add the forced break back to the last item
then the last item on column 1 goes back to column 1. This shows that the
forced break does work in some scenarios at least. I have uploaded 2 further
test cases; 1 with the forced break and 1 without.
In conclusion it seems there is a bug with forced breaks not being honoured in
all circumstances and your patch seems to fix it, but I'm not 100% certain if
that's the correct solution. It probably needs to be reviewed by one of the
layout gurus.
Thanks,
Chris
--
Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
