[Fwd: [xsl] Sun xmlroff XSL Formatter as SourceForge Project]
Hello there! So, xmlroff is available at SourceForge now. Original Message Subject: [xsl] Sun xmlroff XSL Formatter as SourceForge Project Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 14:44:42 -0600 (CST) From: Robin Cover [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] See: http://xml.coverpages.org/ni2003-02-19-a.html http://sourceforge.net/projects/xmlroff/ http://xmlroff.sourceforge.net/index.html Apologies if this is a duplicate reference. Robin - Robin Cover XML Cover Pages WWW: http://xml.coverpages.org Newsletter: http://xml.coverpages.org/newsletter.html XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list -- Oleg Tkachenko Multiconn Technologies, Israel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Fwd: [xsl] Sun xmlroff XSL Formatter as SourceForge Project]
Oleg Tkachenko wrote at 20 Feb 2003 10:42:11 +0200: Hello there! So, xmlroff is available at SourceForge now. Yes. And Robin Cover did such a good summary page on the announcement that it's a hard act to follow. I expect this to be my last post to fop-dev about xmlroff. If you are interested in xmlroff, see the SourceForge sites. Regards, Tony Graham XML Technology Center - Dublin Sun Microsystems Ireland Ltd Phone: +353 1 8199708 Hamilton House, East Point Business Park, Dublin 3x(70)19708 Original Message Subject: [xsl] Sun xmlroff XSL Formatter as SourceForge Project Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 14:44:42 -0600 (CST) From: Robin Cover [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] See: http://xml.coverpages.org/ni2003-02-19-a.html http://sourceforge.net/projects/xmlroff/ http://xmlroff.sourceforge.net/index.html Apologies if this is a duplicate reference. Robin - Robin Cover XML Cover Pages WWW: http://xml.coverpages.org Newsletter: http://xml.coverpages.org/newsletter.html XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list -- Oleg Tkachenko Multiconn Technologies, Israel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Long licence
Thanks, your help is most welcome. Yes, we have to change all three :-) codebases. On 20.02.2003 08:33:31 Oleg Tkachenko wrote: Jeremias Maerki wrote: That's it. The board has finally spoken. We need to change to long licences in our codebase. Anyone out there with free time? If not, I can do it. I can help you. Should we change both codebases? Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Licence issues in hyphenation patterns
Victor Mote wrote: I don't think the LPPL works at all for us. The preamble says: You may distribute a complete, unmodified copy of The Program. Distribution of only part of The Program is not allowed. Well, as I already wrote in another post, it's not really clear what The Program is in the context of the hyphenation files. The case I examined had *only* the hyphenation file in the directory the URL pointed to, with no visible affilations to any other files from either the context nor the file itself (did not mention ..is part of The Program or something. I concluded The Program is in this case the hyphenation file itself. Also I think the preamble refers to *unmodified* files. Derived works seems not to be covered there. The important part for us is that the LPPL is not viral, with the exception of the filename prohibition. In particular it allows distributing derived work (read: binary FOP distributions) without the code. BTW we should track down and delete all binary distribution containing the compiled hyph file from the three GPL sources. The source distributions are not an immediate risk and can be kept. Who has access to the distro repository? J.Pietschmann - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Licence issues in hyphenation patterns
Jeremias Maerki wrote: You could be right about apply the Apache licence. Does everbody agree in this case? Unless the old license somehow prevents it, we can choose any license we like for any Derived Work we can claim copyright for (golly... though shalt not and a sentence with a preposition, lest they think you come from Texas... :-) J.Pietschmann - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Licence issues in hyphenation patterns
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Creating patterns for Portuguese is much simpler than with English. Thank you for the explanation. I *knew* there should be something easier than english. Or german. Or hungarian, FTM. There is still an unresolved issue: why do so many people still use english? :-) Actually I did this in my spare time, and only some months later I came to use it in a company project that used FOP (with my influence, of course). So the file is not property of Petrobrás, it is mine. Good to hear! But my employee wouldn't care anyway. Petrobrás' business is oil, not software, You wouldn't believe where PHBs go searching for something to squeeze money out of when funds run short... I am donating the hyphenation file to the ASF, and although it would be nice to keep the copyright, I think that would hamper future enhancements, or not? As long as you don't choose to revoke the license for all future and past versions (rather than forking or whatever), there wouldn't be a problem. This was recently extensively discussed on slashdot in response to an interview with a real lawyer. J.Pietschmann - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17194] - LineArea Leader fails in 0.20.5rc2
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=17194. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17194 LineArea Leader fails in 0.20.5rc2 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-02-20 23:16 --- This happens if the line area overflows. The two longest section titles are too long. Shorten them until the problem is fixed. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Looking for the best location for a barcode library
Victor Mote wrote: I agree. There are some other parts of FOP that would seem to be similar -- fonts and hyphenation come to mind. I was always under the impression there is some overlap with Batik, programs producing charts or organigrams (drawing boxes around text) and the like. Now, who's going to coordinate this stuff? J.Pietschmann - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Licence issues in hyphenation patterns
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am donating the hyphenation file to the ASF, and although it would be nice to keep the copyright, I think that would hamper future enhancements, or not? As long as you don't choose to revoke the license for all future and past versions (rather than forking or whatever), there wouldn't be a problem. This was recently extensively discussed on slashdot in response to an interview with a real lawyer. From a quick look at the contributors license (I couldn't find a link that works) it appears that when code is contributed to the ASF the copyright is granted to the ASF. THe contributor does reserve remaining rights, title and interest. I don't know if code contributed under this agreement is the same as code contributed with normal patches etc., maybe it is implied? Keiron. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ready to go again
OK, I am ready to jump in do some work. Sorry for being out of action for so long. The threads that I would like to complete, or at least resolve, first, are: 1. Documentation. The main problem here is the web site generation, but it seemed to me that Peter and some others may have gotten that working. If so, is the readme doc up-to-date? (The last time I tried to run it, in December, the generation failed with errors). everything seems to be working fine on: http://forrestbot.cocoondev.org/ with only a couple of broken links. It is possible to update the site from the web interface (I haven't tried it) if you know the password. Keiron. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Long licence
Jeremias, Can we put the copyright notice at the end of the files? It's a PITA haaving it at the beginning. I'll change the FOP_0-20-0_Alt-Design files. Peter Jeremias Maerki wrote: Thanks, your help is most welcome. Yes, we have to change all three :-) codebases. On 20.02.2003 08:33:31 Oleg Tkachenko wrote: Jeremias Maerki wrote: That's it. The board has finally spoken. We need to change to long licences in our codebase. Anyone out there with free time? If not, I can do it. I can help you. Should we change both codebases? Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Peter B. West [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/ Lord, to whom shall we go? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 17194] - LineArea Leader fails in 0.20.5rc2
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=17194. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17194 LineArea Leader fails in 0.20.5rc2 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-02-21 06:55 --- Modifing the titles is one solution, but not really satisfing considering the long title was just continued on a second line - i.e. this was working in 0.20.1 - 0.20.5rc - and FOP will properly crash on a lot of documents with long titles. Anyway, sometimes one is not allowed to modify anything in a document, i.e. if a document is committee work.. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Licence issues in hyphenation patterns
On 20.02.2003 23:58:48 J.Pietschmann wrote: Victor Mote wrote: I don't think the LPPL works at all for us. The preamble says: You may distribute a complete, unmodified copy of The Program. Distribution of only part of The Program is not allowed. Well, as I already wrote in another post, it's not really clear what The Program is in the context of the hyphenation files. The case I examined had *only* the hyphenation file in the directory the URL pointed to, with no visible affilations to any other files from either the context nor the file itself (did not mention ..is part of The Program or something. I concluded The Program is in this case the hyphenation file itself. I agree. Also I think the preamble refers to *unmodified* files. Derived works seems not to be covered there. The important part for us is that the LPPL is not viral, with the exception of the filename prohibition. In particular it allows distributing derived work (read: binary FOP distributions) without the code. Yes, but see point 4, for example. That will be difficult for the compiled hyphenation patterns. BTW we should track down and delete all binary distribution containing the compiled hyph file from the three GPL sources. The source distributions are not an immediate risk and can be kept. Who has access to the distro repository? Good thought! Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Looking for the best location for a barcode library
On 21.02.2003 00:17:51 J.Pietschmann wrote: Victor Mote wrote: I agree. There are some other parts of FOP that would seem to be similar -- fonts and hyphenation come to mind. I was always under the impression there is some overlap with Batik, programs producing charts or organigrams (drawing boxes around text) and the like. Now, who's going to coordinate this stuff? Well, for Apache-local stuff this is the Apache community. Maybe small packages that are of use in more than one place one of the many Commons projects may be the right place. We could at least try to compile a list of those known to us and put it on the FOP site. For packages that exist outside of Apache we can only have some links to them. Don't know how this can be coordinated at all. At least, having pointers to such projects on the FOP website helps these projects to gain publicity. Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
