--- "Andreas L. Delmelle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Simon Pepping
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <snip />
> > All in all I think that this change simplifies the
> code, and would be
> > a good change.
> > Allow me to make some notes:
> > 1. Would it not be a good idea to move
> Property.java from fo to
> > properties?
> A question that was on the tip of my tongue too...
> I'd think: not only
> Property.java, but all related Maker-classes as
Another option, Finn, is to move all the Property
subclasses to fo.properties (even if they're alongside
the makers, nested or unnested), after thinking about
it, I think that will be a little bit clearer than
having them in the datatype package. Comments?
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!