Summary: | [PATCH] List label and bodyindentation incorrect in RTF | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Fop - Now in Jira | Reporter: | David Lai <dlai333> |
Component: | rtf | Assignee: | fop-dev |
Status: | NEW --- | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | maximilian.aster |
Priority: | P2 | Keywords: | PatchAvailable |
Version: | 0.93 | ||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Hardware: | PC | ||
OS: | Windows XP | ||
Attachments: |
Patch proposal
Result of the posted fo Another small test fo RTF after patch applied Fo file |
Description
David Lai
2007-05-09 16:53:34 UTC
Created attachment 22932 [details]
Patch proposal
Changed several things, also in RtfListItem.java.
The attribute "provisional-distance-between-starts" should now also be handled correctly.
Created attachment 22933 [details]
Result of the posted fo
Created attachment 22934 [details]
Another small test fo
Thanks for the patch, I'm processing it ATM. So far I found that you've made some minor mistakes in following code guidelines. Specifically { brace should appear on same line as IF test and whitespace hasn't been used inbetween operators in the IF test. Created attachment 22941 [details]
RTF after patch applied
Are you sure that the patch is correct? After I apply the patch and correct the minor checkstyle issues, the RTF generated is very different from the one you attached. Specifically I don't see the list labels at all when viewing the RTF in Word.
Created attachment 22942 [details]
Fo file
Sorry for the guideline mistakes.
To be generated correctly i had to remove the newlines between the fo:block, fo:inline and the text inside the list-item-label.
Thanks for sending the FO. I thought I'd corrected the whitespace but I guess I must have missed something. The first test file then Renders as expected, but the second test file gave me some odd results in the PDF Renderer, which I was comparing to the RTF Result. I raised bug 46294 against List Indentations in PDF. However, I don't think the RTF Renderer behaves correctly as per the specification with your patch applied. Certainly the patch is an improvement to the existing code, but it seems to compute the indents incorrectly, e.g. for example the start-body() function should be based on the indent of the list-block + provisional-distance-between-starts and not take into account the start-indent on list-item. resetting P2 open bugs to P3 pending further review increase priority for bugs with a patch change status from ASSIGNED to NEW for consistency |