I don't mean to offend anyone participating in this thread, as all are valuable contributors to this project, and I understand that you are trying to improve things. However, I think it may be important to point out that the goal here is not necessarily to make the web site the best that it can be, but rather to make the web-site the best that it can be *cost-effectively*. I doubt that nitpicking the web site colors or the nuances of "compliance" vs. "conformance" are of general interest to this list.
I have a suggestion. This is a serious suggestion, not sarcastic or cynical. If you seriously want to discuss such issues, consider creating a separate list for them, perhaps [EMAIL PROTECTED] I may be shot for this, but I'll put up a link on the mailing list page to that list. For each issue, get 10 or more people to vote on it, with at least 2/3 agreeing that a change is needed. (A super-majority is important to prevent flip-flops). Summarize them once a month & submit the package to the fop-dev mailing list. I will do my best to either implement them or explain why not on the fop-nitpick list. If FOP were a mature project with all features implemented and very few bugs to fix, I might take a different attitude. The truth is that we have 3 or 4 active developers who have a large mountain to climb, and IMO it is just wrong to drag them away to deal with issues like this. If there is genuine and general confusion about the content, then *please* continue to raise those on the list, as fixing the doc once is better than answering 100 emails on the same subject. Victor Mote --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
