Arnd Beißner wrote: > "Peter B. West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 19.05.2004 00:12:41: > > > I think you are talking about different modularisation > contexts here. > > You might want to clarify this part of the discussion with Victor. > > I really thought it was about the "pluggable" layout that > Victor brought up a long time ago. If not, just forget what I > said. 8-)
You are correct that LayoutStrategy, aka pluggable layout was at the heart of the topic. And Peter is correct that the scope of modularization in LS was at a different level than you were talking about. But I don't understand Peter's point at all. If separation of concerns between page layout and block layout is beneficial, then how much more so that neither of them should be embedded in the FOTree??!! (Which FOP developers decided to redo just last week). The fact that you are successfully modularizing trees into branches and leaves is no argument against FOP modularizing the forest into trees. Victor Mote
