Glen Mazza wrote:
--- Victor Mote [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Glen, what are your
plans for
apps/FOInputHandler? Will it be going away or get
renamed anyway? I have
been using Handler as related to SAX events, and
it looks like we have it
also being used as I/O in a more raw form.
Victor--
After looking over the new design, I like it. Please
keep your FOInputHandler abstract base class as-named.
FOTreeHandler also is a very good name.
I'd like to keep, however, at least for the time
being, the naming convention in fop.apps with
InputHandler as well. It's the command
I don't feel strongly about this, but after trying to untangle some of the
relationships between classes and packages, and knowing that Glen is doing
more of the same, we may find it moderately useful to create a parse
package where classes like FOTreeBuilder (which needs to be renamed) and
--- Victor Mote [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Glen, what are your
plans for
apps/FOInputHandler? Will it be going away or get
renamed anyway? I have
been using Handler as related to SAX events, and
it looks like we have it
also being used as I/O in a more raw form.
Here's my thoughts on this
