Jeremias Maerki wrote:
I just don't want to stand on your toes.
If I were afraid of someone stepping on my toes, I'd either
shut up or commit the stuff right to CVS and damn the flak!
The wiki is a whiteboard for collecting ideas. This includes
wiping stuff which did not stand the test of time.
On 17.02.2003 21:08:20 J.Pietschmann wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > That was my original idea, to build FOP on Avalon, provide an
> > Avalon-based API (for advanced users and Cocoon) but have a standard
> > easy-to-use API that's not Avalon-based. Unfortunately, the Wiki page
> > currently do
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
That was my original idea, to build FOP on Avalon, provide an
Avalon-based API (for advanced users and Cocoon) but have a standard
easy-to-use API that's not Avalon-based. Unfortunately, the Wiki page
currently doesn't reflect this.
No problem here: edit the proposal to re
I've just decided not to comment any detail point that has been
discussed ATM because I'm currently uneasy with the current process of
forming the new API. It's too much of a bottom-up approach IMO. I fear
that we're losing ourselves in some details when not even the high-level
stuff is decided.
I
On 05.02.2003 10:32:11 Klaas_Bals wrote:
>
> Let me first quickly introduce myself. The compay I work for, Inventive
> Designers, has a product called Scriptura, which is tool to work with XSLT
> and XSL-FO. Scriptura consists of a WYSIWYG designer for XSL stylesheets,
> and an Engine which does
Keiron Liddle wrote:
[avalon configuration vs. own data structures]
I don't know what to do. Do you?
No.
Hm. So how do we proceed? Should I add defineFont/defineFontTriplet?
Any idea how to impove the status quo?
On other issue I forgot to mention is the caching, ie saving pages or other data
> Keiron Liddle wrote:
> > Then the question seems to be: is the default setup good enough for those
who
> > don't want to use avalon for configuration. Then how else should they present
the
> > information when avalon is precisely designed for the purpose.
> > If it is just setting some simple
Keiron Liddle wrote:
Then the question seems to be: is the default setup good enough for those who
don't want to use avalon for configuration. Then how else should they present the
information when avalon is precisely designed for the purpose.
If it is just setting some simple values, okay, but
> Keiron Liddle wrote:
> > For the configuration with the FOProcessor and the Renderer how does it
work.
>
> Actually there are two approaches which at least appear to be in
> conflict.
> The Avalon approach: implement Configurable and perhaps Composable
> and use an Avalon container which takes
Keiron Liddle wrote:
For the configuration with the FOProcessor and the Renderer how does it work.
Actually there are two approaches which at least appear to be in
conflict.
The Avalon approach: implement Configurable and perhaps Composable
and use an Avalon container which takes care of reading
Stephan Michels wrote:
I never used Wiki, so I don't want to break something.
It is never too early or too late to learn. Read the FAQ, play
a bit in the sandbox. A history is kept, so you can't really
break anything.
Which XML presentation do you prefer internally SAX/DOM?
SAX as internal *
On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, J.Pietschmann wrote:
> Stephan Michels wrote:
> > And why do you not use org.apache.excalibur.source.Source instead, and use
> > org.apache.excalibur.xml.dom.DOMParser and
> > org.apache.excalibur.xml.sax.SAXParser to get the content for you
> > StreamSource or SAXSource?
>
>
Subject: FOP API proposal in FOP wiki
Hi All,
I think it is generally quite good and thorough. There are some areas I'm not sure
about.
For the configuration with the FOProcessor and the Renderer how does it work.
Is the renderer configuration inside the FOP configuration and therefore done
inside the FOProcessor. How should it wor
Stephan Michels wrote:
And why do you not use org.apache.excalibur.source.Source instead, and use
org.apache.excalibur.xml.dom.DOMParser and
org.apache.excalibur.xml.sax.SAXParser to get the content for you
StreamSource or SAXSource?
Because I can't find any of the above in my Excalibur source
d
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
> J.Pietschmann wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I polished the FOP API proposal at
> > http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?FOPAvalonization
> > a bit. Everybody is invited to review and add content. The discussion
> > points are after the code near the end.
>
> Took ju
J.Pietschmann wrote:
Hi all,
I polished the FOP API proposal at
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?FOPAvalonization
a bit. Everybody is invited to review and add content. The discussion
points are after the code near the end.
Took just a quick look. The "Component" interface is depr
Hi all,
I polished the FOP API proposal at
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?FOPAvalonization
a bit. Everybody is invited to review and add content. The discussion
points are after the code near the end.
I think real discussion, with arguments and counterarguments, should
take place on
18 matches
Mail list logo
