DO NOT REPLY [Bug 3430] - Running Head Missing Line at the first 3 pages

2002-05-13 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3430. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 3692] - Table header sometimes does not work.

2002-05-13 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3692. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

RE: Font Metrics AWT

2002-05-13 Thread Torsten Erler
I'm using fop v0.20.3, on WINNT 4.0 SP6, java v1.3.1 (required for the project - 1.4 not possible at this time) Here are the results from command line awt rendering for java 1.3.1 and java 1.4 (looks better) cu Torsten (ThanX for replies) -Original Message- From: Ralph

AW: AW: Latest FOP schema

2002-05-13 Thread J.U. Anderegg
J. Pietschmann wrote: fo:block are Rectangular areas, perhaps indented and with border, padding and other individual traits, nested into a rectangular area. I understand setting traits, properties. How about page layout, setting inline and baseline postitions? Does it imply a unconditional

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 3824] - MIF option with tables

2002-05-13 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3824. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

new batik

2002-05-13 Thread Keiron Liddle
Hi, Since a new beta of batik has been released I think we can go with this for the next release. I will put the new batik into cvs and update the code to work with it. Keiron. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

cvs commit: xml-fop/lib batik.jar readme

2002-05-13 Thread keiron
keiron 02/05/13 02:48:49 Modified:lib batik.jar readme Log: updated to batik1.5 beta 2 Revision ChangesPath 1.8 +3724 -3128xml-fop/lib/batik.jar Binary file 1.9 +1 -1 xml-fop/lib/readme Index: readme

Re: [PATCH] Proper use of font encodings for native fonts

2002-05-13 Thread Keiron Liddle
One reason for waiting was to see how it would work. There are some user issues that have popped up but nothing too serious. It would be good to know how people should deal with this situation. A new patch would certainly help. Christian might be able to say more about this. On Sun, 2002-05-12

RE: AW: Latest FOP schema

2002-05-13 Thread Arved Sandstrom
Comments intermingled. -Original Message- From: J.U. Anderegg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: May 13, 2002 5:15 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: AW: AW: Latest FOP schema J. Pietschmann wrote: fo:block are Rectangular areas, perhaps indented and with border, padding and

cvs commit: xml-fop/src/org/apache/fop/svg PDFAElementBridge.java PDFImageElementBridge.java PDFTranscoder.java SVGElement.java SVGUserAgent.java

2002-05-13 Thread keiron
keiron 02/05/13 03:29:53 Modified:lib Tag: fop-0_20_2-maintain batik.jar readme src/org/apache/fop/image/analyser Tag: fop-0_20_2-maintain SVGReader.java src/org/apache/fop/svg Tag: fop-0_20_2-maintain

Re: new batik

2002-05-13 Thread Alex McLintock
At 09:40 13/05/2002, Keiron Liddle wrote: Hi, Since a new beta of batik has been released I think we can go with this for the next release. You mean we'll go with the next *release* of Batik with the next release of FOP... We aren't shipping beta software with our release are we? Any chance

Re: new batik

2002-05-13 Thread Keiron Liddle
On Mon, 2002-05-13 at 12:59, Alex McLintock wrote: At 09:40 13/05/2002, Keiron Liddle wrote: Hi, Since a new beta of batik has been released I think we can go with this for the next release. You mean we'll go with the next *release* of Batik with the next release of FOP... We

Re: new batik

2002-05-13 Thread Alex McLintock
Alex wrote: Any chance of upping the version number of FOP to something like 0.91 because some people don't seem to like using software as low as 0.24 At 12:45 13/05/2002, Keiron Liddle wrote: I didn't know making software was as easy as setting a number. I should have put a smiley in there

Version numbers (WAS:RE: new batik)

2002-05-13 Thread Rhett Aultman
Believe me when I say that I am well aware of how important promotion is in a project, but I still don't think that we should inflate a version number just to attract new users. FOP has now had articles published about it more than once in XML Journal, which is a far greater sign to users of

RE: Latest FOP schema

2002-05-13 Thread Joerg Pietschmann
Arved Sandstrom Arved_37@ wrote: I think the predominant opinion is (assume all of this fits on one page) - a normal block area (generated by the outer block) that contains: one or more line areas for level_0_text fills to position A; then a block area with one or more line areas for

fo:external-graphic

2002-05-13 Thread Holger Prause
Hello, I have to make a FOP customization for processing the fo:external-graphic statement.(Because the imges are stored in a strange way which i dont want to explain in details) What classes should i take a look at ? Whats the best entry point for that ? Thank you very much , Holger Prause

Re: fo:external-graphic

2002-05-13 Thread Jeremias Maerki
I have to make a FOP customization for processing the fo:external-graphic statement.(Because the imges are stored in a strange way which i dont want to explain in details) Are you sure that this is really necessary? It would be interesting to know what exactly makes you believe you need to do

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 4233] - Table Split over 2 pages (Race condition???)

2002-05-13 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4233. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 9054] New: - PDF Tc Text operator BUG

2002-05-13 Thread bugzilla
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9054. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.