|
Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing |
| Summary: | FOP: Problem with Image Width? | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [openSUSE] openSUSE 11.4 | Reporter: | Tanja Roth <taroth> |
| Component: | Documentation | Assignee: | Thomas Schraitle <thomas.schraitle> |
| Status: | VERIFIED INVALID | QA Contact: | Karl Eichwalder <ke> |
| Severity: | Normal | ||
| Priority: | P5 - None | ||
| Version: | Factory | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Other | ||
| OS: | Other | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Found By: | Documentation | Services Priority: | |
| Business Priority: | Blocker: | --- | |
| Marketing QA Status: | --- | IT Deployment: | --- |
| Bug Depends on: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 702276 | ||
|
Description
Tanja Roth
2011-07-18 15:07:16 UTC
I've built the openSUSE Startup and compared the PDF. Well, I cannot see any difference in regard to image width between XEP and FOP. However, the linebreaks and pagebreaks are different (but that was to be expected). Maybe we can look into this issue next week? :) Sorry, cited wrong attachment in the bug description, see https://bugzilla.novell.com/attachment.cgi?id=437718 No problem. :) Together we found out that the respective graphic contained a typo in its width attribute (140% instead of less than 100%). Therefore, FOP used this value and override its margins. It seems to me, this is the correct behavior. For some reasons, XEP doesn't do the same as FOP and overprint the margins. It stays below 100%. It may be an implementation detail, but for the time being, it is not really a bug itself. Therefore, closing it as INVALID. Thanks anyway for the report and figuring it out with me! :-) |