On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 4:55 PM Andreas Beeker <kiwiwi...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Tim, > > I've made that changes on purpose, as I wanted to make the EMF API similar > to the WMF one. > > > oap.hemf.extractor.HemfExtractor -> oap.hemf.usermodel.HemfPicture > All (?) our user models are called by their content and being similar to > WMF, I had to rename the class. > > > HwmfRecord.getRecordType() -> getWmfRecordType() > The EMF records extends the WMF records, so this makes it more clear what > kind of record type to ask for. > > > oap.hemf.record.AbstractHemfComment -> oap.hemf.record.hemf.Comment > > oap.hemf.record.HemfRecord -> oap.h.r.emf.HemfRecord > > > As both sets (emf and emfplus) contain quite a few records, I've decided > to split their packages. > > I'm now looking at the other (not yet resolved) issues you opened. > > Andi > > >
