Re: alignment-baseline and aligment-adjust properties
+1 for a) On 21.10.2005 02:28:42 Manuel Mall wrote: See the response at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xsl-editors/2005OctDec/0006.html. We have taken the opposite approach and added the property values to the property defintions. We could now: a) just remove them or b) leave the values in and issue a warning when used Given that FOP 0.20.5 doesn't support this at all and it is therefore unlikely we would be breaking anything for users moving from FOP 0.20.5 to FOP trunk if we go for option a) I would recommend to apply the KISS principle in this case and just remove them. Manuel Jeremias Maerki
Re: alignment-baseline and aligment-adjust properties
On Oct 21, 2005, at 08:40, Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 21.10.2005 02:28:42 Manuel Mall wrote: We have taken the opposite approach and added the property values to the property defintions. We could now: a) just remove them or b) leave the values in and issue a warning when used +1 for a) Same here. If it was the intention of the editors to delete them, then it makes no sense at all to add them to the property definitions (like I myself suggested, IIRC). Cheers, Andreas
Re: alignment-baseline and aligment-adjust properties
On Oct 20, 2005, at 5:28 PM, Manuel Mall wrote: See the response at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xsl-editors/2005OctDec/0006.html. We have taken the opposite approach and added the property values to the property defintions. We could now: a) just remove them or b) leave the values in and issue a warning when used +1 a) Regards, Web Maestro Clay -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://homepage.mac.com/webmaestro/ My religion is simple. My religion is kindness. - HH The 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet
Re: alignment-baseline and aligment-adjust properties
On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 08:28:42AM +0800, Manuel Mall wrote: See the response at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xsl-editors/2005OctDec/0006.html. We have taken the opposite approach and added the property values to the property defintions. We could now: a) just remove them or b) leave the values in and issue a warning when used Given that FOP 0.20.5 doesn't support this at all and it is therefore unlikely we would be breaking anything for users moving from FOP 0.20.5 to FOP trunk if we go for option a) I would recommend to apply the KISS principle in this case and just remove them. +1 for this proposal. Simon Manuel -- Simon Pepping home page: http://www.leverkruid.nl
alignment-baseline and aligment-adjust properties
See the response at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xsl-editors/2005OctDec/0006.html. We have taken the opposite approach and added the property values to the property defintions. We could now: a) just remove them or b) leave the values in and issue a warning when used Given that FOP 0.20.5 doesn't support this at all and it is therefore unlikely we would be breaking anything for users moving from FOP 0.20.5 to FOP trunk if we go for option a) I would recommend to apply the KISS principle in this case and just remove them. Manuel
