Replies: 2 comments 1 reply
-
|
The current version: The possible option without backward compatibility: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
One element that stays within one page should have one bounding box. I'm not sure that I see the use case of having one element with multiple bounding boxes on the same page. If it crosses some columns, then it will either be split by them into multiple elements, or those columns are joined, and there should be one bounding box. For maximum backward compatibility we can utilize "id" field that every table has. Make ids unique, add new field "next_table" or something like that. This will allow us to merge multiple tables into one multi-page table at later steps of processing and is 100% optional and backward compatible. Probably the easiest option for us as well. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Currently location of any content node is defined as a single bounding box on a page (
bounding boxandpage numberproperties). This is not good enough if an element is spread across several pages or even several columns on the same page. This is a typical use case for paragraphs, list and list items, table rows and tables.Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions