[lmi] tasks 2007: bug 13655 and 13656: years of zeros

[Evgeniy Tarassov]

-----------
Composite output displays too many durations
http://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/?13655
   cvs checkout - Wed Jul 6 00:54:44 2005 UTC

   Durations past the life of the youngest individual's
   mortality age are displayed on a composite. This
   results in years of zeroes illustrated.

If I understand it correctly this item and the next one is the same issue.

-----------
Output displays durations past lapse
http://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/?13656
   This defect actually refers to the display of zeros
   after a lapse on the illustration. Using cvs checkout
   'lmi-20060829T1922Z' and 'xml_notebook_coli_boli.xrc'
   consider:

   File | New | Illustration
   Sample product
   Payments tab- 10000 2; 0
   OK
   File | Print Preview

   A lapse occurs on the guaranteed and current basis yet
   the illustration continues on through maturity displaying
   years of zeros after the current lapse. This scenario can
   be observed on the composite as well.

   I'll assume that this referred to loans and withdrawals.
   The change committed on 20060725T1423Z should fix that.

   cvs checkout - Wed Jul 6 00:54:44 2005 UTC

   Durations past the current lapse year are
   displayed on both the individual report and
   composite reports.

I understand that in the pdf document generated for an illustration
(and/or census) for certain entered data (as in the example given) the
output contains alot of zeros. Some charts in that generated pdf
document contain zero-rows (like the 'Tabular detail' table or the
'Numeric summary' table). I do not think i correctly understand the
term lapse, and how could it be determined from the ledger values (is
it the first year so that it and every year that follows have 0 (zero)
Individual payment?).
What should be done to correct the issue?
Should we "purge" the zero rows from all the tables? Does it have to
be done on a per-table basis (which means that for one table that
"lapse" will occure at, say, 51, and for another at 11)? Should we
eliminate all the empty (zero-only) rows or only such a tail of zero
tables leaving untouched an empty row if there is some non-zero data
that follows it in that same table below)?