Re: [lmi] Reg D group "illustration-assumption" page missing?

[Greg Chicares]

On 2018-09-28 21:51, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Sep 2018 21:09:13 +0000 Greg Chicares <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> GC> Vadim--Having once studied 'reg_d_group.xsl',
> 
>  I'm afraid this one of those experiences that you tend to evacuate as
> quickly as possible for self-protection

That's for sure.

> GC> can you remember why
> GC> this logical page:
> GC>         <!-- Define the Illustration Assumption Detail page. -->
> GC>         <fo:simple-page-master master-name="illustration-assumption">
> GC> seems never to print? AFAICT:
> GC>  - Old XSL-FO PDFs match new wxPdfDoc PDFs for 'sample2gpp'.
> GC>  - New PDFs have no code for this page.
> GC>  - Old PDFs do have code for this page, but seem never to print it.
[...]
>  My hypothesis would be that there are no columns at all in this table
> because the variable "illustration_assumption_columns_raw" is not defined.

Thanks, you have helped me to find the explanation, I think. Compare
[reformatted to make the difference stand out]:

    <xsl:variable name="columns" select="$basic_illustration_columns
  [not(@composite) or boolean(boolean(@composite='1')=$is_composite)]"/>

    <xsl:variable name="columns" select="$supplemental_illustration_columns
  [not(@composite) or boolean(boolean(@composite='1')=$is_composite)]"/>

    <xsl:variable name="columns" select="$illustration_assumption_columns
  [not(@composite) or (boolean(@composite='1')=$is_composite)]"/>

To make the difference really stand out, here's the second part of each line,
with blank space added and marked:

  [not(@composite) or boolean(boolean(@composite='1')=$is_composite)]"/>
  [not(@composite) or boolean(boolean(@composite='1')=$is_composite)]"/>
  [not(@composite) or        (boolean(@composite='1')=$is_composite)]"/>
                      ^^^^^^^

I speculate that this solves the solution-domain mystery. As for the
problem-domain mystery (if this page has never been printed, is it
in any way a business requirement?)...

>  BTW, if we just need to add this page to the new PDF code, this would seem
> to be straightforward to do, so I could do this too.

...I'll have to ask on Monday when the office is open again. The answer
may very well be that no such page should be added now.