On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 08:15:38PM +0200, J.Pietschmann wrote: > Glen Mazza wrote: > >You have a new FO, you're going to need to code for > >them--including ordering and cardinality--in those > >parents that accept them, > > This does *not* necessarily mean that *you* should arrange > that the extension writer has to replace core FO classes. > In fact do either: > 1. Declare FOP wont support extensions except in > instream-foreign-object, ever, or > 2. Provide hooks so that extension writers can get their > extensions running with FOP, with or without extensive > validation of the extended content model, but at least > *without* having to rewrite and replace core FO classes.
My thoughts are along the same lines that Jörg has argued. I think we should do option 2. vCN() should be written such that it allows this. Regards, Simon -- Simon Pepping home page: http://www.leverkruid.nl
