-Original Message-
From: J.Pietschmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: October 6, 2002 12:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: character
Arved Sandstrom wrote:
Why is character=- a parsing error? The XML Recommendation
has at least
one example of an attribute value
-Original Message-
From: J.Pietschmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: October 6, 2002 12:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: character
Arved Sandstrom wrote:
Can you cite the specific productions that lead to this
conclusion? I am not
saying that you are wrong but I
-Original Message-
From: J.Pietschmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: October 6, 2002 1:29 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: character
Arved Sandstrom wrote:
An Expr can be a Literal, the production for which is
'' [^]* ''
| ' [^']* '
If I look at the first
-Original Message-
From: J.Pietschmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: October 6, 2002 2:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: character
Arved Sandstrom wrote:
And unless _I_ am missing something, - precisely matches that
production.
You are looking
-Original Message-
From: Kevin O'Neill [mailto:kevin;rocketred.com.au]
Sent: November 11, 2002 5:47 PM
To: FOP Developers
Subject: Re: A performance patch for PDFInfo class
[ SNIP ]
String buffers are used by the compiler to implement the binary string
concatenation operator +. For
+1.
-Original Message-
From: Keiron Liddle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: November 20, 2002 5:23 AM
To: FOP
Subject: [VOTE] Victor as committer
Hi Developers,
I propose we have a vote for Victor to become a committer.
Plenty of eagerness shown already and I am sure he
Realistically I should be considered inactive myself. Thanks for bringing
this up, Art.
I just happen to have a brutal workload at the moment and I don't see it
lessening in the next 4 months, minimum. It's fun stuff - I love it - but at
the end of a workday I can't stand to look at code much,
-Original Message-
From: Peter B. West [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: November 26, 2002 3:25 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Alt-Design status: XML handling
Rhett,
To comment on only two aspects of your posting.
Rhett Aultman wrote:
-Original Message-
From:
Considering that our new chief executive is Greg Stein, I'd be surprised if
this isn't on the horizon. :-)
-Original Message-
From: J.Pietschmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 1, 2002 4:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Still on for freeze deadline?
Jeremias
Response below.
-Original Message-
From: J.Pietschmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 7, 2002 7:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Redesign issues
[ SNIP ]
Now the biggest issue: the layout managers itself. At the first
glance it is
not obvious why they should be
-Original Message-
From: Peter B. West [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 9, 2002 8:56 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Redesign issues
Keiron Liddle wrote:
I still believe that it is useful to have the layout managers separate
from the fo tree. There are a
Responses below.
-Original Message-
From: Keiron Liddle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 10, 2002 5:56 AM
To: FOP
Subject: RE: Redesign issues
Hi Arved,
On Mon, 2002-12-09 at 20:30, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
The feeling I got from my prototype is that there is not much
Not to sound bitter, but it would have been nice to know about this sooner.
This pretty much usurps what I and Eric Bischoff have been doing (when we
can); I sort of figure it didn't get written in the last month either. Any
reason for the blasted secretiveness?
Arved
-Original Message-
-
From: Peter B. West [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 13, 2002 8:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sun XSL Formatter
Arved Sandstrom wrote:
Not to sound bitter, but it would have been nice to know about
this sooner.
This pretty much usurps what I and Eric Bischoff have
-Original Message-
From: Peter S. Housel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 14, 2002 2:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sun XSL Formatter
Arved Sandstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, Java or C or C++ or Haskell, it would have been nice to
have a clue.
We
-Original Message-
From: Victor Mote [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 14, 2002 3:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Sun XSL Formatter
Peter S. Housel wrote:
Looks like they want to donate it to Gnome, not Apache.
AFAIR, the BSD license is pretty incompatible
-Original Message-
From: Victor Mote [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 14, 2002 3:40 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Sun XSL Formatter
Arved Sandstrom wrote:
But can I point out that C is about as portable as it gets?
Maybe someone on this list has time to throw
-Original Message-
From: Tony Graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 16, 2002 12:23 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Sun XSL Formatter
Arved Sandstrom wrote at 14 Dec 2002 15:05:05 -0400:
No bitterness at all, actually, Peter. It takes a bit of wind out of my
But it was plausible. :-)
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Dean Rusk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: December 18, 2002 12:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Sun XSL Formatter
Then I retract the suggestion.
Pat
-Original Message-
From: Tony Graham
Title: JforIntegrationInFop - background and guidelines
I
looked at the page, Rhett. It looks good as a mission statement. This area
interests me a lot too, and I hope to start adding to it.
Arved
-Original Message-From: Rhett Aultman
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: December
-Original Message-
From: Joerg Pietschmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: January 3, 2003 5:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Footnote Problem
Hi all,
is the footnote are supposed to span the whole page width even
if the body region has columns? If so, adding a footnote
Joerg, you can freely get rid of that stuff. I originally introduced it when
I had more faith in the spec, and thought that the authors knew what they
were talking about when it came to to their math. Specifically, the lineage
pairs is an abstract concept that I can see no implementation use for.
Arved Sandstrom wrote:
Joerg, you can freely get rid of that stuff.
Great!
Anybody out there bothering to profile the new code? Two
objects less created per Area, this should be noticable!
J.Pietschmann
-
To unsubscribe
Dirk, you may have seen my post on members, about this. The whole length of
license issue.
I find it odd that it's OK to suggest tools (IDEs/editors, etc) to hide a
license. When the argument presented to the board was presumably that the
long license is legally required.
I'd like to find out
, the IDE should just as a service to the developer hide the
licence because it's not relevant to normal development tasks.
On 21.02.2003 14:01:34 Arved Sandstrom wrote:
I find it odd that it's OK to suggest tools (IDEs/editors, etc)
to hide a
license. When the argument presented to the board
Arved Sandstrom wrote:
They are not connected concepts, Mark. I originally put in the code for
lineage pairs, and also started the implementation for markers. So I can
assure you that they are completely unrelated. For what it's worth,
subsequent contributors have significantly improved
-Original Message-
From: Dirk-Willem van Gulik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: February 21, 2003 1:35 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Long licence
On Fri, 21 Feb 2003, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
I'd like to find out what lawyer thought a long license is
needed with every
Hi, Keiron
I interpret 6.11.4 as follows. Number one, the names have to match -
marker-class-name and retrieve-class-name. This is straightforward. It
defines qualifying areas.
Number two, qualifying areas are excluded if they follow the page being
formatted, regardless of retrieve-boundary. So
Comments below.
-Original Message-
From: Peter B. West [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: February 24, 2003 6:53 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: markers in redesign
[ SNIP ]
It seems to me that the hierarchy is not the same as the area tree or
fo tree hierarchy. It is a
Comments inline.
-Original Message-
From: Tony Graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: February 24, 2003 10:26 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: markers in redesign
Arved Sandstrom wrote at 24 Feb 2003 08:01:40 -0400:
Comments below.
-Original Message
Comments below.
-Original Message-
From: Keiron Liddle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: February 24, 2003 10:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: markers in redesign
Exactly. All definitions regarding retrieve-position exclusively
refer to the current page. There is not a
-Original Message-
From: Keiron Liddle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: February 25, 2003 9:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: markers in redesign
Looking at it again, I disagree. The containing page is the page
containing the first area generated or returned by the
who are
interested in more - documentation, planning, the community, etc. The former
category, just as the non-committer developers, is not to be denigrated, but
you can defintely identify committers who take an interest in the big
picture as leaders.
Arved Sandstrom
-Original Message
-Original Message-
From: J.Pietschmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: June 16, 2003 5:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Nomination of Glen Mazza as committer
Victor Mote wrote:
Being the greenest committer, I had hoped to defer this
nomination to a more
senior
-Original Message-
From: Bertrand Delacretaz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: September 2, 2003 2:49 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Place committers on inactive list?
Le Mardi, 2 sep 2003, à 03:33 Europe/Zurich, Glen Mazza a écrit :
...Perhaps Karen, Arved and Bertrand
-Original Message-
From: John Austin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: November 20, 2003 12:37 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Development Environment suggestions ?
So far I have been playing around like the Neanderthal*
that I am. I use Sun Java 1.4.x with xterm, vi, emacs and
201 - 236 of 236 matches
Mail list logo
