> -----Original Message-----
> From: Glen Mazza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 1.0's bookmarks are different from 0.20.5's, the former has
> fox:bookmarks as the "parent" element.
> It's been that way in 1.0 for a long time,
> before I came on board I believe.

Yes, and it even has been discussed this summer. Silly me forgot to check
the archives *before* changing and committing :-)

> I don't like the nomenclature we have in FOP 1.0 that much.
> fox:outline comes from the PDF specification's term for a
> bookmark, but the PDF spec calls it an "outline item",
> and fox:bookmarks (parent level, holding all the outline
> items) IIRC is called a "document outline" in the PDF
> spec.  I guess fox:bookmarks (top-level), and fox:bookmark(child
> elements) might be better, but better enough to warran switching
> what we currently have?  I'm unsure.

Well, some consistency would indeed look prettier, i.e.
   fox:bookmarks / fox:bookmark
or fox:outlines / fox:outline
or (more verbose) fox:document-outline / fox:outline-item

But for now, I think I can live with it.



Reply via email to