Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Ok, if we want that 1.0 won't be out before September.
Too bad. As already mentioned, changing IPD page masters worked reasonably well in 0.20.5 and I think people will expect this to work in a 1.0 release too. OTOH, if the frequency of questions on the lists are taken into account, support for collapsing table borders, even if only partial, has a much higher priority. I don't see any of the other mentioned features as a show stopper for 1.0.
That remark comes pretty late, but yeah, if anyone else think this should be fixed, we should do it SOON.
Well, someone should have looked at this before (I made some style related notes during the API discussion). The guide lines are - consistency with the Java RTL identifier guide lines, in particular the rule that common acronyms in identifiers are all upper case - internal consistency - avoiding redundancy We can restrict this to the essential user visible API, i.e. the packages o.a.fop.apps and o.a.fop.cli. My suggestions - Rename o.a.fop.apps to o.a.fop.api. This is a major change breaking everything, and should have been done in the same step when the Driver was replaced by the Fop class. I wont insist on this change. - If the "Fop" in FopFactory is the acronym for "FO processor", the class should be named FOPFactory instead. Same for Fop --> FOP (precedent is the java.net.URL class). - If it's the other way around FOPException should be renamed as FopException. - MimeConstants should be renamed as MIMEConstants. - FOURIResolver should probably be renamed as plain URIResolver (the FO prefix may be deemed redundant because of the package), or as FOPURIResolver. Two consecutive acronyms in an identifier are awkward in any case. - Same for FOUserAgent --> UserAgent or FOPUserAgent - The method applyHttpBasicAuthentication should be renamed applyHTTPBasicAuthentication. - Rename the CLI parameter "-param" to "-xsltparam" or something (too generic) We could keep and deprecate the unrenamed classes in order to ease the transition. If the API is really declared "stable", the beta tag can be dropped from the release number even for a pre 1.0 release. Should we hold a formal vote on the API style issue? Either way, I'd even volunteer to do the changes (it's easy enough :-). J.Pietschmann
