https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53902
--- Comment #4 from Vincent Hennebert <[email protected]> --- (In reply to comment #3) > Hmm, > In PDF 1.5 spec, TH seems exist as a workaround to the limitation of the > html table model, from witch the tagged PDF table-model seems to be inspired. > As I said, such table model describe a stacked rows structure, and there is > no mechanism to describe alternative structure, where 1st column can be > handled as header. > Note that the "TH" scope value could be determined from the "grandfather" of > the fo:table-cell (table-header), and/or, if implemented, the nature of the > corresponding column or column group (header/footer column-group). Hmmm. That makes a lot of sense. Actually the structure type of cells that descend from a table-header is already automatically determined this way. We could extend that mechanism to 'header' columns. A cell that is in such a column would be given a structure type of TH with a scope or Row; A cell that is also inside an fo:table-header would be given a scope of Both. That would avoid manually setting role and fox:scope on every cell of the header column. I like this idea a lot, however the time I have allocated on this is running low. I'll see if I can modify my current implementation to do this. So fo:table-column would take an extension property fox:header being either true or false (the default). WDYT? > IMHO, there is no need to use a table-cell role attribute for that. > Personally, I don't use tagged PDF, but sometimes I'm facing to the lake of > "vertical" headers in FO table model, and I think that here, the End-user > need is having such feature, rather than an html/TH-like tweak, breaking the > table structure. > And your schema illustrates perfectly what I say ;) > *all* "row headers" are in the same column... > And you have a cell header for each row, so with a cell implementation, you > have to repeat the action on each row, while with a column implementation, > you repeat it only once. Thanks for your feedback! Vincent -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
