Chris Bowditch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on: 18.05.2004 14:31:39: > What I forgot to say is that I think we should do an initial release of FOP > after doing just High priority TODO items.
Ok, that changes things, of course. > Yes, ugly output can be caused without border collapse, but yet RenderX's XEP > doesnt have border collapse, > so I dont see an immediate need for it. After all, output only looks ugly if > you specify borders on every cell edge, > with careful writing of the FO, the output can still look good without border > collapse. True. Well, partially so. If you have, for example, tables with small fonts and lots of narrow columns and horizonal space is scarce, then it gets increasingly difficult to create good-looking table borders between columns without border-collapse. Maybe my focus is shifted a little too much on the actual problems that I have with my customer's requirements. Also, in my formatter, I want to implement the collapsing model early, because it's default in FO and because I want to get everything out of the way that I don't have an immediate solution for. Makes me nervous otherwise. As for FOP, ok, I do agree that getting a formatter out that is at least as good as 0.20.5 may take priority. Bye, Arnd -- Arnd Beißner Cappelino Informationstechnologie GmbH Bahnhofstr. 3, 71063 Sindelfingen, Germany Tel.: +49-7031-763863-11, Fax: +49-7031-763863-99 Mobile: +49-173-3016917 Chris Bowditch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 18.05.2004 14:31:39: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Chris Bowditch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 18.05.2004 12:03:33: > > > >>This is very true, I also have the same concerns, which is why I have > >>set out > >>some simple objectives that must be met before the redesign is ready for > >> an initial release. See here: > >> > >>http://xml.apache.org/fop/design/layout.html#status-todo > > > > One comment on the todos: > > > > - border-collapse is both important and difficult. I am still fiddling > > with > > details of the spec. I suggest ugrading the priority. Not supporting > > border-collapes yields ugly output. > > What I forgot to say is that I think we should do an initial release of FOP > after doing just High priority TODO items. > Yes, ugly output can be caused without border collapse, but yet RenderX's XEP > doesnt have border collapse, > so I dont see an immediate need for it. After all, output only looks ugly if > you specify borders on every cell edge, > with careful writing of the FO, the output can still look good without border > collapse. > > > Well, unfortunately not so much spare time, but as I said, doing it > > alone really, really helps. And I very much tried to aggregate as > > much spare time as possible into full dev-only days. That helps, too. > > With the same background, most of you committers could have done the > > same. If you look at it, most successful projects initially had > > 1 or 2 people at the start who did the core work, and then others > > joined to make it complete. If I had joined the redesign team, FOP > > wouldn't be much farther than it is now, because most of my time > > would have gone to discussions, which in turn would also have taken > > up other committer's time. > > Perhaps, but perhaps not. As long as you dont make major changes, then its > possible to proceed without seeking group consent on every little item. Thats > what I'm trying to do. Work towards a working layout a bit at a timeusing the > existing redesigned framework. > > > What I *can* offer to contribute is discussion about the FO spec or about > > implementing PS oder PDF output. This is a concern that we probably share > > and that needs discussion in any case. However, for actual implementation > > discussions I feel a little reluctant. If my pet project becomes a product > > in the future, we will have the same issues coming up here that we had > > with > > the RenderX guy speaking up here recently. This is not what I want - > > though > > I think what he did was perfectly ok, well-meaning and to be applauded. If > > I recall correctly, the uproar was resolved, the RenderX guy got his > > deserved > > apology, but the consensus was that the FOP code should be kept "clean" > > from > > competitor's code or even ideas. If I remember that correctly and this > > still > > stands, then I would rather not discuss algorithms here. > > Fair enough. That was an unfortunate affair, and one I'm keen not to repeat. > > Chris > >
