On Sat, May 06, 2006 at 11:31:38PM +0800, Manuel Mall wrote:
> I wonder if we should agree on some guidelines for the use of namespaces 
> (namespace prefixes) for extensions. I am thinking along the following 
> lines:
> 
> The namespace "http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/extensions"; (common 
> prefix "fox") is reserved for generic extensions to FOP supported 
> across all (e.g. if handled by layout) or most renderers.
> 
> Extensions specific to a particular renderer and / or extensions which 
> constitute a rendering hint (e.g. render this image as a grayscale) 
> should be in a renderer specific namespace. That namespace name is 
> formed by appending the common renderer acronym to the above generic 
> extension namespace, e.g. 
> http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/extensions/pdf or 
> http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/extensions/pcl or 
> http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/extensions/afp. At the same time the 
> usual prefix for those extensions would be just the renderer acronym.

This sounds fine to me.

> Even if the same type of rendering hint can be used by different 
> renderers they still should be in separate namespaces as this allows 
> the user control over behaviour on a per renderer basis without 
> changing the fo file. For example lets assume we want to support image 
> conversion hints which allows tuning of the image output format. 
> Instead of having <fo:external-graphic 
> fox:output-conversion="grayscale" src="xyz.png" /> I would recommend to 
> use render specific hints like <fo:external-graphic 
> afp:output-conversion="grayscale" pcl:output-conversion="bitmap" 
> pdf:output-converion="jpeg" src="xyz.png" />. This may not be a good 
> example but I hope it illustrates what I am trying to achieve.

I see what you are trying to achieve. Wouldn't users find this
overdone, and wonder why they cannot do with a single hint for all
renderers? Or would a single hint just not work?

Regards, Simon

-- 
Simon Pepping
home page: http://www.leverkruid.eu

Reply via email to