Victor Mote wrote:
We're OK. I caught your irony. My response was really entirely to Oleg's
question. However, I really was concerned about offending someone -- things
like names and logos carry a certain emotional weight.
In other words, I might worry about offending some on this list, but it
r
Peter B. West wrote:
> Re my comment on this, I thought I should warn you that I am addicted to
> ironical jokes, which can be a dangerous habit with email. I dislike
> emoticons, probably because I am more of a snob than I like to admit,
> but also because they seem to me to discourage any attem
Victor Mote wrote:
It must be a cultural thing. The dictionary definition you gave should tell
the story well enough -- see the example "felt contempt for the mincing
...". The word is a pejorative, but perhaps more so in my part of the world,
where calling someone a "fop" or a "dandy" might be f
On Monday 13 January 2003 11:05, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> On 12.01.2003 11:40:57 Bernd Brandstetter wrote:
> > After having tried to understand how fop works by just reading the
> > code for a couple of hours now, FOrtress inevitably comes to my mind
> > ;-) (in the sense of: Not easy to get in, at
Oleg Tkachenko wrote:
> I like it. First of all "FOP" is well-known among the whole xml
> community for ages (what costs much) and secondly "fop" word has a
Yes, this is the primary consideration. The only reason why I mention it now
at all is that changing such things is always better done soone
On 12.01.2003 04:59:36 Jeff Turner wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 05:43:37PM +0100, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > Hi Jeff
> >
> > I've applied your patches locally. Thanks. Everything's ok with the
> > first one, but with the second one I'm having problems (not your fault!):
> > - I had to add adj
On 12.01.2003 11:40:57 Bernd Brandstetter wrote:
> After having tried to understand how fop works by just reading the code for
> a couple of hours now, FOrtress inevitably comes to my mind ;-)
> (in the sense of: Not easy to get in, at least for a newbie)
:-) Unfortunately, Fortress is already t
On Saturday 11 January 2003 20:13, Victor Mote wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > - Do we like our current logo? :-)
>
> I hope I am not out of line to ask an even more fundamental question --
> do we like our current name? I never have a problem writing it, but when
> speaking it, I cannot make m
On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 05:43:37PM +0100, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> Hi Jeff
>
> I've applied your patches locally. Thanks. Everything's ok with the
> first one, but with the second one I'm having problems (not your fault!):
> - I had to add adjust the inline DTD of skinconf.xml to include the role
Victor Mote wrote:
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
- Do we like our current logo? :-)
I hope I am not out of line to ask an even more fundamental question -- do
we like our current name? I never have a problem writing it, but when
speaking it, I cannot make my mouth say "fop", but invariably say
"eff
Victor Mote wrote:
I hope I am not out of line to ask an even more fundamental question -- do
we like our current name?
I like it. First of all "FOP" is well-known among the whole xml
community for ages (what costs much) and secondly "fop" word has a
meaning itself wrt eXtensible stylesheet la
J.Pietschmann wrote:
What about a TeX-parody?
+--- +--\
| | |
+-- /--\ +--/
| || |
| || |
||
\--/
Not bad, but what does it mean? (And does logo should mean anything?) :)
Colored as the current logo, or more in shades like the
Apache feather?
Oleg Tkachenko wrote:
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
- Do we like our current logo? :-)
Uh!
Should admit I spent a couple of
hours trying to implement my ideas about the logo (leading motifs were
medieval typographic dropcaps and a parrot as (imho) the most foppish
animal) but I'm too bad artist an
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
- Do we like our current logo? :-)
That's a big question actually :) afair Keiron said the current logo
should be at least brighten to fit forrest-ed site design better or
suggested to make the logo contest. Should admit I spent a couple of
hours trying to implement my
Hi Jeff
I've applied your patches locally. Thanks. Everything's ok with the
first one, but with the second one I'm having problems (not your fault!):
- I had to add adjust the inline DTD of skinconf.xml to include the role
attribute:
- The credit element produces a rather ugly FOP logo. Bu
15 matches
Mail list logo
