On Oct 28, 2004, at 12:52 PM, Victor Mote wrote:
Hi Clay:

I was looking at the compliance page on a totally unrelated topic, and
noticed that the property "font-variant" (Sec. 7.8.8) is listed as "no".
When it is convenient, that should probably be changed to "partial" with
comments similar to the following:

Funny you should pipe in today. Believe it or not, last night, /forrest/ actually returned a BUILD SUCCESSFUL using the current xml-fop/ (after many weeks/months? spent tweaking this and that)! More details (including pretty links to the forthcoming xml-fop web site) can be found in the ongoing Forrest thread[1] (or, now that I figured out how to use my web space, you could just go here[2] :-p).

Unfortunately, I still have a few problems (see [1]), including a rather gaping hole in the FOP Compliance page (it doesn't show *any* content--d'oh!). I'm also working on some problems with various problems in the portion of the web site. The problems are most notably:
- design/
(no content)
- design/
(content but all sub-links have no content)

1. "True small-caps (glyph substitution) is not supported. However, faux
small-caps is supported, i.e. lower-case glyphs are shown as their
corresponding upper-case glyphs, but at a smaller point size."

2. "[Workaround] For fonts that have true small-caps in a separate font,
true small-caps can be achieved through your stylesheet. Use a different
<strong>font-family</strong> to point to the true small-caps font instead of
using <strong>font-variant</strong>."

It may also be worth announcing the doc change on fop-user. Let me know if
you have any questions. Thanks.

Actually, if you could help me a bit to figure out what happened with the compliance page, that might help me understand more about that page, and the system used to output its rather complicated table.


Victor Mote

[1] [EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=14876

Web Maestro Clay
Clay Leeds - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Webmaster/Developer - Medata, Inc. - <>
PGP Public Key: <>

Reply via email to