Thanks. I did not know about the change. It certainly is a better writing style.
I am still finishing the details of my documentation. After that I want to work on the layout. Regards, Simon On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 09:20:50PM -0700, Glen Mazza wrote: > Yes, the way I see it, one of FOP's successes will be > our close adherence to JAXP. Another one will be a > very strict and solid FO validation component--a "firm > handshake" that hopefully will paint FOP as a > Tomcat-like reference implementation for XSL. > > BTW, Simon, and everyone else, there's about 30 or so > validateChildNodes() left to be written--many of them > quite complex. Feel free to help out if you'd like! > > Glen > > --- "J.Pietschmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Simon Pepping wrote: > > > The code in Root shows that fox:bookmarks is the > > only allowed fox > > > child of fo:root. It is not clear that that is > > true. The web page > > > extensions.html does not even mention > > fox:bookmarks. The example file > > > examples/fo/basic/pdfoutline.fo clearly embeds > > fox:outline elements in > > > fox:bookmarks. The docbook stylesheets authors > > place fox:outline > > > elements directly in fo:root. FOP-0.20.5 has no > > problem with this > > > arrangement. Even if it is true, it creates > > compatibility problems. > > > > This was changed in the redesign, outlines for > > bookmarks must now > > be put into a fox:bookmark. Yes, this is > > incompatible but cleans up > > pathological cases like > > <fo:root> > > <fox:outline>...</fox:outline> > > <fo:layout-master-set ... /> > > <fox:outline>...</fox:outline> > > <fo:page-sequence> > > </fo:page-sequence> > > <fox:outline>...</fox:outline> > > <fo:page-sequence> > > </fo:page-sequence> > > </fo:root> > > Some bookmarks in the above case wont be rendered, > > and it's quite > > difficult to reliably check for this condition. If > > there can only > > be a single fox:bookmark, error checking is much > > easier. Some would > > also claim it enforces better writing style. > > > > J.Pietschmann > > > > > -- Simon Pepping home page: http://www.leverkruid.nl
