Yes, it makes sense and I agree with you, too. We should try to find a way to share the handling of relative values for both types of handlers.
On 27.01.2006 20:21:10 Simon Pepping wrote: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 06:56:21PM +0100, Andreas L Delmelle wrote: > > On Jan 27, 2006, at 18:28, Andreas L Delmelle wrote: > > > > > > > >Right now, it works, and it enhances our RTF output, so there's no > > >need to revert, but I'm wondering if there isn't an alternative > > >solution that would look/feel better. > > > > Since I started this... > > > > I'm thinking in the direction of using the PercentBaseContext > > interface here, instead of the layoutmgr specific classes that > > implement it. IOW: approach the percentage resolution as something > > that is shared between structural and non-structural renderers, > > instead of the non-structural renderer borrowing functionality from > > the structural one. > > > > Does this make sense? > > I share your objections against the mixing of packages. Jeremias Maerki
