On Monday 18 March 2002 13:37, Peter B. West wrote: >. . . > Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > >In conclusion, I think an interface based on XML documents (possibly > >this "pr.fo" discussed above) is the best choice to use between the > > FOP "property resolution" stage and the "structure renderers" like > > RTF and MIF renderers. > > The big problem is in defining the p.res step. How far do you need > to go with this? If you require all of the relative lengths > resolved, e.g., you'll have to wait until the layout is done. The > properties are only finalised as the area tree is being constructed. > It's one of the things that makes this all so frustrating.
ok I see. I'll try to play with this for RTF rendering based on jfor, to get a feel for how hard/useful this is. In case of jfor, what is needed is mostly property inheritance, for which AFAIK rules are well defined in FOP. I guess relative lengths will probably stay relative in the RTF code, but I'll have to play with it to be positive about this. -Bertrand --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
