Hi Andreas, Andreas L Delmelle a écrit : > On Jan 9, 2007, at 15:22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Author: vhennebert >> Date: Tue Jan 9 06:21:59 2007 >> New Revision: 494416 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=494416 >> Log: >> In relaxed validation mode, it should be acceptable to have >> fo:table-footer /after/ fo:table-body > > Just a little note about this. I'm not vetoing this change but I would > certainly not recommend it. Allowing a table-footer as last element in > the table drastically increases the complexity of layout of multi-page > tables. > > True, in the current design, the whole table is present when layout > beings (so that means flow.Table.tableFooter will be non-null if there > is a footer), but consider the difficulties if we were to alter this > interaction, and begin layout for the Table before the end of the table > is reached. At that point, the footer might not yet be present, and we > would again be stuck in a situation where we need to have the entire > table in memory... > > Just a thought.
Well, personally I would probably not have changed anything if I hadn't been asked to, you know... It seems that documents with fo:table-footer after fo:table-body are quite common in real world cases. Now I understand your concern. What I propose to do is the following: 1. display a warning that putting table-footer after table-body is evil, even in relaxed validation mode; 2. throw an error if the enclosing table has "table-omit-footer-at-break" = false and a table-footer is discovered after table-body. That's the only case where there would be a negative impact on performance, IIC. I think if we choose 2. then we can forget 1. WDYT? Vincent
