>>On 2002.03.21 09:47 "Fries, Markus, fiscus GmbH, Bonn" wrote: >> Hi, >> >> a lot of questions on this list are caused by properties which are not >> implemented. Often there are workarounds though. I think it would make >> sense to put some real effort into >> http://xml.apache.org/fop/limitations.html and >> http://xml.apache.org/fop/implemented.html. Or maybe there is such a >> collection already of which I don't know? >> >> Regards, >> >> Markus Fries >> > >Hi, > >If you have any suggestions about how to do this easily then share your >ideas with us. > >Do you have some volunteers in mind to put the real effort into getting >this done?
Hi, I can think of one volunteer so far :). I have to do some documentation on that stuff for my project anyway and if my supervisor does not mind I can share that. Jens: >I've suggested (or asked) to create a special fop.dtd (not a fo.dtd). >This wouldn't regard all limitation and no workarounds, but it would be a very good tool for imlementing applications using FOP. > > ... > A fop.dtd will answer all these question like: Feature XYZ is not working, is it a bug in my FO > document or a missing FOP feature. Maybe workarounds can be mentioned in the fop.dtd, too. > Since fo.dtd exists, it wouldn't be too much work to add these comments. Yes, I think this would be very helpful. But it has one drawback though. You realize only after implementing that s.th. doesn't work and expensive rework is necessary. Anyway the fop.dtd sounds like a very good start. When it gets running we can think of rearranging the collected information in addiditional documentation. What do you think? Best regards Markus Fries
