Peter,
it's ok if you make other people aware of your project but the way you
did that in your last post disturbs me. We know that you disagree with
FOP's approach, but I would have preferred a more constructive form of
making Mark aware of Defoe. Maybe I'm overreacting...
On 17.01.2005 06:01:27
Jeremias,
Do you disagree with the assessment? Clearly people might, but I didn't
say anything I don't believe is the truth about the state of FOP. If it
is true, isn't it fair to let newcomers know the state of play? Finn
has already talked about a radically different approach in order to
Peter,
this is not about the question whether I disagree with the assessment.
You might be right, you might be wrong. I can't tell, yet, because I'm
still working my way into the new layout engine. My reaction was
triggered by the way you said these things, not by any technical
statement. But as
Peter,
FWIW, I was shocked by the tone of your statement as well. Not so much
by any misleading or such. Rather, it was more in the way that I'm
shocked by the manner that, in the US companies can discuss differences
with other products in their advertisements.
Had you also 'advertised' FOray
(Don't let Peter rattle you, Jeremias--he's just
jealous that I've found more XSL spec bugs than him.
;)
Our delays are mostly related to advanced issues
concerning layout, and the type of parser used doesn't
have much effect on this issue. So I don't share
Peter's conviction that FOP is in
Glen Mazza wrote:
(Don't let Peter rattle you, Jeremias--he's just
jealous that I've found more XSL spec bugs than him.
;)
You have a lead I am unlikely to overhaul.
Our delays are mostly related to advanced issues
concerning layout, and the type of parser used doesn't
have much effect on this
