Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> On 10.02.2009 13:22:01 Vincent Hennebert wrote:
>> Hi Jeremias,
>>
>> A few suggestions:
>>
<snip/>
>>>      <section id="introduction">
>>>        <title>Introduction</title>
>>>        <p>
>>> -        The intermediate format (IF) is a proprietary XML format that 
>>> represents the area tree 
>>> -        generated by the layout engine. The area tree is conceptually 
>>> defined in the 
>>> +        Apache FOP now provides two different so-called intermediate 
>>> formats. The first one
>>> +        (let's call it the area tree XML format) is basically a 1:1 XML 
>>> representation of the FOP's
>>> +        area tree generated by the layout engine. The area tree is 
>>> conceptually defined in the 
>>>          <a 
>>> href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xsl-20011015/slice1.html#section-N742-Formatting";>XSL-FO
>>>  specification in chapter 1.1.2</a>.
>>> -        The IF can be generated through the area tree XML Renderer (the 
>>> XMLRenderer).
>> Renaming this class into AreaTreeRenderer or AreaTreeXMLRenderer will
>> probably allow to avoid confusion in the future.
> 
> -1 to that. Will break backwards-compatibility for those who are using
> this renderer directly. It would break at least two pieces of software I
> have.

Breaking backwards-compatibility because of an important change in an
API is a thing, simply have a class renamed is a non-issue if you ask
me. It’s just a small search/replace and recompilation.
To make things a little bit smoother though, XMLRenderer could be made
deprecated with a suggestion to switch to AreaTree[XML]Renderer.


> If you you generate SAX events
> (AbstractXMLRenderer.setContentHandler()), working with MIME types isn't
> enough.

I’m missing the point here?


> Besides, I don't think that would really improve the whole thing
> much. After all, with the new IF, we're not primarily talking about
> renderers but something else (IFDocumentHandler/IFPainter).

It’s never too obvious. After all, the two sections in the documentation
are very similar.

Vincent

Reply via email to