Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java

2005-03-02 Thread Simon Pepping
On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 09:15:37PM -0800, Glen Mazza wrote: OH!!! lightBulb state=on wattage=25/ Yes, you're right, Chris--now I see the issue. I implemented validation for about 80% of the FOs, but 80% is not 100%. fo:table-body never had any validation implemented, hence the NPE's

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java TableFooter.java

2005-03-02 Thread Glen Mazza
Thanks Simon. Glen --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: spepping2005/03/02 13:03:25 Modified:src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java TableFooter.java Log: Corrected a validation problem. Made TableFooter use TableBody's validation.

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java

2005-03-02 Thread Chris Bowditch
Glen Mazza wrote: Hi Glen, OH!!! lightBulb state=on wattage=25/ Yes, you're right, Chris--now I see the issue. I implemented validation for about 80% of the FOs, but 80% is not 100%. fo:table-body never had any validation implemented, hence the NPE's that were occurring. I'm glad this issue

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java

2005-03-01 Thread Glen Mazza
OH!!! lightBulb state=on wattage=25/ Yes, you're right, Chris--now I see the issue. I implemented validation for about 80% of the FOs, but 80% is not 100%. fo:table-body never had any validation implemented, hence the NPE's that were occurring. Sorry, Jeremias, I thought you had just

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java

2005-02-25 Thread Chris Bowditch
Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 25.02.2005 07:21:25 Glen Mazza wrote: snip/ For the moment I'm not going to answer the veto itself. Your veto makes this situation a one against one. I have presented my reasons for the change and therefore, I request feedback from the rest of the committers on this

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java

2005-02-25 Thread The Web Maestro
On Feb 24, 2005, at 10:21 PM, Glen Mazza wrote: --- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have nothing more to say about this. I want to spend my time on more productive things now. Jeremias, I'm going to veto (-1) your change. I would like the content model restored to the XSL standard and

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java

2005-02-25 Thread Glen Mazza
Jeremias, My veto still stands, along with the seven technical reasons given for it. Glen --- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 25.02.2005 07:21:25 Glen Mazza wrote: snip/ For the moment I'm not going to answer the veto itself. Your veto makes this situation a one against

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java

2005-02-25 Thread Simon Pepping
On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 10:21:25PM -0800, Glen Mazza wrote: Jeremias, I'm going to veto (-1) your change. I would like the content model restored to the XSL standard and the FONode.removeNode() method removed. I support Jeremias' change, and vote +1. Technical reasons: 2.) You failed

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java

2005-02-25 Thread Glen Mazza
Simon, Thanks for reading and responding to my concerns. I appreciate it. Your endorsement of this change is sufficient for me--I am withdrawing my veto. Regards, Glen --- Simon Pepping [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 10:21:25PM -0800, Glen Mazza wrote: Jeremias, I'm

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java

2005-02-24 Thread Glen Mazza
--- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. Empty table-bodies make no sense but it makes life easier for stylesheet writers not to have to work around them. I don't see the benefits. In XSLT, one does a test to see if there is data in the source XML that would constitute a

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java

2005-02-24 Thread Glen Mazza
--- Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have nothing more to say about this. I want to spend my time on more productive things now. Jeremias, I'm going to veto (-1) your change. I would like the content model restored to the XSL standard and the FONode.removeNode() method removed.

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java

2005-02-24 Thread Jeremias Maerki
On 25.02.2005 07:21:25 Glen Mazza wrote: snip/ For the moment I'm not going to answer the veto itself. Your veto makes this situation a one against one. I have presented my reasons for the change and therefore, I request feedback from the rest of the committers on this matter even if it's just a

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java

2005-02-23 Thread Glen Mazza
Jeremias, This should not be done. If someone has a problem with it--and I've never heard a complaint--they can send an email to xsl-editors, for them to adjust the content model for fo:table accordingly. (If they don't, they don't.) Note that the editors are very reasonable about this--for

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java

2005-02-23 Thread Glen Mazza
--- Glen Mazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jeremias, This should not be done. If someone has a problem with it--and I've never heard a complaint--they can send an email to xsl-editors, for them to adjust the content model for fo:table accordingly. (If they don't, they don't.) To

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/flow TableBody.java

2005-02-23 Thread Jeremias Maerki
FOP 0.20.5 ignores an empty table-body, no error message. XEP 4 displays a validation error and continues. AltSoft Xml2PDF does the same. FOP CVS HEAD now does the same. The justifications for both changes are in the commit message. If you prefer a hard exception in the case of an empty