Glen Mazza wrote:
> I'd like to keep, however, at least for the time
> being, the naming convention in fop.apps with
> InputHandler as well. It's the command line "input
> handler" in apps, just like your abstract class is in
> apps.fo. If/when they start to conflict, we'll come
> up with better
Victor--
After looking over the new design, I like it. Please
keep your FOInputHandler abstract base class as-named.
FOTreeHandler also is a very good name.
I'd like to keep, however, at least for the time
being, the naming convention in fop.apps with
InputHandler as well. It's the command lin
Glen Mazza wrote:
> --- Victor Mote <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Glen, what are your
> > plans for
> > apps/FOInputHandler? Will it be going away or get
> > renamed anyway? I have
> > been using "Handler" as related to SAX events, and
> > it looks like we have it
> > also being used as I/O in a
--- Victor Mote <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Glen, what are your
> plans for
> apps/FOInputHandler? Will it be going away or get
> renamed anyway? I have
> been using "Handler" as related to SAX events, and
> it looks like we have it
> also being used as I/O in a more raw form.
>
Here's my though
