Bug report for Fop [2003/06/01]

2003-06-02 Thread bugzilla
+---+ | Bugzilla Bug ID | | +-+ | | Status: UNC=Unconfirmed NEW=New ASS=Assigned

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 20397] New: - [PATCH] Move Structure LayoutHandlers to fo/area packages

2003-06-02 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20397. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 20397] - [PATCH] Move Structure LayoutHandlers to fo/area packages

2003-06-02 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20397. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 20397] - [PATCH] Move Structure LayoutHandlers to fo/area packages

2003-06-02 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20397. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 20398] New: - [PATCH] removing org.apache.fop.tools.xslt package

2003-06-02 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20398. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 20398] - [PATCH] removing org.apache.fop.tools.xslt package

2003-06-02 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20398. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

RE: Team page

2003-06-02 Thread Glen Mazza
Looks good -- would you please update my email address to my work address on the team page: glen.mazza.at.eds.com. (.at. like all the other email addresses on that page to avoid spam concerns!) Thanks, Glen --- Victor Mote [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Glen Mazza wrote: My email was meant as a

Area Tree vs. subsequent renderer (was Re: FO property expressions)

2003-06-02 Thread Glen Mazza
Thanks, Peter, for the explanation on the property/inheritance computations--I have one more question, perhaps anyone can answer (The Area Tree/Renderer explanations on the Design Tab is somewhat vague on this point): For those output formats requiring an area tree (i.e., non-TXT, RTF, etc.),

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 20407] New: - [PATCH] Configure image caching using the configuration file

2003-06-02 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20407. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 20407] - [PATCH] Configure image caching using the configuration file

2003-06-02 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20407. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

[GUMP] Build Failure - xml-fop-maintenance

2003-06-02 Thread Sam Ruby
This email is autogenerated from the output from: http://cvs.apache.org/builds/gump/2003-06-02/xml-fop-maintenance.html Buildfile: build.xml init-avail: init-filters-jdk14: [echo] JDK

[GUMP] Build Failure - xml-fop

2003-06-02 Thread Sam Ruby
This email is autogenerated from the output from: http://cvs.apache.org/builds/gump/2003-06-02/xml-fop.html Buildfile: build.xml init-avail: [echo] Jimi Support NOT Present [echo]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 20411] New: - German hyphenation is ^H^H^Hwas missing

2003-06-02 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20411. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 20411] - German hyphenation is ^H^H^Hwas missing

2003-06-02 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20411. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

Re: Thoughts on design - FO expressions in markers

2003-06-02 Thread Peter B. West
Fopdevs, Further to this topic. Peter B. West wrote: Yes, and this whole post was a bit of a disaster. The point I had fuzzily in mind was that the resolution of marker properties can only occur as the area tree (of the fo:flow) is being constructed. Only then does current page have any

Re: [GUMP] Build Failure - xml-fop

2003-06-02 Thread Jeremias Maerki
Looks like your message simply got stuck in the moderator's queue. On 30.05.2003 18:17:31 Thomas DeWeeese wrote: Jeremias Maerki wrote: Hi Batik-Devs, the latest changes in Batik broke both the maintenance branch and HEAD of FOP:

Re: [GUMP] Build Failure - xml-fop

2003-06-02 Thread Thomas E Deweese
JM == Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: JM However, I'm worrying about binary compatibility. At the moment we JM have to tell our users that they have to use the Batik-version JM delivered with FOP. I'd like to see Batik's API stabilize some JM more so people can just download the latest