OK, thanks for the enlightenment. --- "J.Pietschmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Glen Mazza wrote: > > Shouldn't we be leery of "render options" where > one > > specifies properties of how the output should look > > outside of what is specified by the XSL-FO file? > > PDF encryption? Printer options? Text encoding? MIF > version? > > > > (If > > there are output properties that cannot be > specified > > sufficiently by XSL-FO 1.0, well, that's what FOP > > extensions or XSL-FO 2.0 would be for, correct?) > > I don't think the WG will accept output format > specific stuff in > the FO source. I personally don't think this is a > good idea either. > > J.Pietschmann >
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
