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]

Reply via email to