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.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to