xmlgraphics-fop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Manuel Mall <man...@apache.org>
Subject Re: keep...="always" and Knuth penalties
Date Fri, 14 Jul 2006 02:36:45 GMT
On Thursday 13 July 2006 22:09, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> What I tried to propose is mostly just that. Implementing some
> shortcut that at least treats all integer values differently from
> "always" with a constant penalty value. That gives FOP the
> opportunity to relax while still allowing the rather intuitive
> "always" not to relax thus providing both kinds of behaviours.
> Relaxing "always" might not be that intuitive/expected for some
> people. Introducing a configuration option makes the whole thing just
> more difficult. This way you can just tell the user to use some
> integer instead of always if he wants the keeps to be relaxable.
>
> Treating integer values differently from "always" is the half way to
> the full implementation but still can be implemented with reasonable
> effort without compromising any future improvements.
>

I agree with Jeremias here. This seems a sensible way forward.

If down the track we have users screaming for "always" to be made 
more 'relaxed' the issue of making this configurable can be revisited.

Manuel
> The only problem I see here is that DocBook may not allow that kind
> of control over the keep values. For everyone else, that's just a
> quick search and replace in the stylesheet.
>
> On 13.07.2006 15:13:59 Chris Bowditch wrote:
> > Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > > Fabio Gianetti made a good comment [1]. I answered like this [2].
> > > I'm currently thinking about how best to implement this. To keep
> > > it simple for the moment, we could implement "always" like before
> > > but remove/disable the overflow recovery I've implemented. That
> > > way, the content would again overflow. All integer values could
> > > be implemented as penalty=999 for the moment (thus allow some
> > > relaxing), at least until we have a good scheme about mapping
> > > integer keeps to penalty values like we started to discuss some
> > > time ago. However, this would disable the possibility to shove an
> > > element ahead n pages in the hope that there will be a page that
> > > the element fits on (the purpose of the overflow recovery). But
> > > that will be a very rare thing anyway, so I don't think there's
> > > any harm. Any objections?
> >
> > Well until integer values for keeps are implemented I object to
> > implementing always such that it generates overflow on a page. The
> > ability to error or clip gives little comfort to users either.
> >
> > Personally I prefer the Renderer to relax the
> > keep-together="always" if required. Fabio seems to suggest in his
> > post that it is implementation dependent what happens in this
> > situation. Maybe we could have a configuration option?
> >
> > <snip/>
> >
> > Chris
>
> Jeremias Maerki

Mime
View raw message