On 05.04.2005 21:59:48 Renaud Richardet wrote:
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Today alone, I've had to reply to two mails sent to me directly.
What did the people wanted to know? With FOP's State, do you mean the
date of the next release?
- Is the project dead?
- Give me release dates or a
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34316.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
Oops, make that three differences: their content
models (child FO's that the spec says they can have)
are slightly different.
Glen
--- Glen Mazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- The Web Maestro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
or something. That way, it's all in one (since it
can apparently be
-Original Message-
From: Glen Mazza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 9:59 AM
1. fo:static-content is to be repeated from its start on
every page, and truncated if it doesn't fit.
You state this very simply and clearly here, but it has always struck me
--- Andreas L. Delmelle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Sorry to be such a nitpick, but the 1.0 Rec. states
literally:
An fo:marker is only permitted as the descendant of
an fo:flow.
and
An fo:retrieve-marker is only permitted as the
descendant of an
fo:static-content.
Thanks for the
Hi
I am new to this mailing list (also fop user mailing list too),
although I have been using FOP for about a year.
Anyway, I had a small problem with dots leader, they did not line up
at the end, and the gap is less than one dot. But still my client
didn't like it. (I am using FOP-0.20.5 July
