--- Finn Bock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > After updating from CVS, it is most likely necessary > to do an "ant > clean" to get rid of the old generated maker > classes, before building. >
Great job--the build is now only 604 classes--1/3 removed! This simplification does make the properties easier to understand (although I'm still quite far from fully comprehending them.) > I have not yet removed the properties.xsl file from > CVS. I guess it > should be removed since it isn't used anymore. > Good idea. > > I've found an argument for unnesting the maker > classes from their > property classes: If we want to put the makers in > its own package and I > think it would be a little cleaner to do that. Using > the fo.properties > package seems natural. > Makes sense. > > Does anyone know why we wrap the datatypes instances > in a property > instance? I think we could avoid the property > instance by having the > datatypes extends an AbstractProperty class which > implement a Property > interface: > Could you explain why we have the datatypes instances to begin with--what they're for? I'm not sure what their precise purpose is. Offhand, it's doesn't seem natural to go without Property objects--they are kept in the PropertyList and indexed by the property ID in that list. Furthermore, those are the objects requested by layout. What would be your alternative storage technique otherwise--I believe, we do (frequently?) have more than one datatype per property, correct? Thanks, Glen __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/
