[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
hi..
i got this error message everytime i run my fop
:
[WARNING] Sum of fixed column widths 793693 greater than maximum specified
IPD 0
This error is simply saying that youve declared columns whose total width is
greater than the width of the page.
Column widths need
TED]Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
m> cc: (cco: Marcelo Jaccoud
Amaral/RJ/Petrobras)
Assunto: Re: IPD
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> One has to partially forgive our American friends
> for such offenses --
> after a century, they still don't use the metric
> system, you cannot ask
> them to respect the prefixes.
>
Ich bin mit Ihnen gar nicht einverstanden! The
prefixes milli, centi, kilo, etc
Marcelo Jaccoud Amaral wrote:
> By the way, "point" is a terrible measurement unit, because in typography
> there are three kinds of points:
> - the Anglo-Saxon point = 1/12 pica = 0,013835 in = 0,3514 mm (no,
> it's not exactly 1/72 in !!)
> - the Didot point = 0,3759 mm
> - the
[EMAIL PROTECTED]cc: (cco: Marcelo Jaccoud
Amaral/RJ/Petrobras)
e> Assunto: Re: IPD
Bernd Brandstetter wrote:
What's the problem? I doubt that ISO owns a patent on those prefixes :-)
It depends. ISO declared it illegal. In many countries this is
backed by law, in the sense if you use an inappropriate combination
and someone takes damage or even only feels confused because of
this,
On Wednesday 03 September 2003 21:48, J.Pietschmann wrote:
> Should be "1/1000 pt", not millipoint, unless you want to attract
> the wrath of the ISO community for using ISO prefixes with non-ISO
> measurement units...
What's the problem? I doubt that ISO owns a patent on those prefixes :-)
Bye,
Chris Bowditch wrote:
I think the unit of IPD is millipoints, but I am not 100% certain,
Should be "1/1000 pt", not millipoint, unless you want to attract
the wrath of the ISO community for using ISO prefixes with non-ISO
measurement units...
J.Pietschmann
Chris Bowditch wrote:
> >Now my question:
> >What is the exact conversion between IPD and pt or px and so on?
> >The value ipd says nothing for me.
>
> IPD stands for Inline Progression Dimension. In some cases this
> equates to
> width, but this is not true in general, if reference-orientation
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Now my question:
What is the exact conversion between IPD and pt or px and so on?
The value ipd says nothing for me.
IPD stands for Inline Progression Dimension. In some cases this equates to
width, but this is not true in general, if reference-orientation is non-zero
(no
Todtenhaupt, Susann wrote:
While transforming with fop I always get the error-message:
At least one of minimum, optimum, or maximum IPD must be specified
on table.
The table width is usually calculated as the sum of the column
widths. If you missed supplying a width for some columns, o
For the first problem, you must specify a column-width attribute for your
table-column. There's no automatic sizing of table columns.
Example
Leaving out the column-width will generate a message from FOP that no column
width information has been supplie
12 matches
Mail list logo