[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2839?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Simon Steiner resolved FOP-2839.
Resolution: Fixed
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1897193
> FOP Ext
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2839?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Simon Steiner updated FOP-2839:
---
Fix Version/s: trunk
> FOP Extensions: Named destination link not work
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2839?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Simon Steiner reassigned FOP-2839:
--
Assignee: Simon Steiner
> FOP Extensions: Named destination link not work
with Acrobat Reader
> FOP Extensions: Named destination link not working
> --
>
> Key: FOP-2839
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2839
> Project: FOP
>
obat Reader DC, bt Chrome PDF Viewer
seems to work fine, so seems to be a quirk with Acrobat Reader
> FOP Extensions: Named destination link not working
> --
>
> Key: FOP-2839
> URL: https://issues.apache.
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2839?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Nadine Ausländer updated FOP-2839:
--
Affects Version/s: 2.6
> FOP Extensions: Named destination link not work
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2839?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17468645#comment-17468645
]
Nadine Ausländer commented on FOP-2839:
---
No reactions on this issue?
&
Nadine Ausländer created FOP-2839:
-
Summary: FOP Extensions: Named destination link not working
Key: FOP-2839
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2839
Project: FOP
Issue Type: Bug
On Feb 12, 2007, at 16:12, Vincenzo Mazzeo wrote:
Hi Vincenzo,
Sorry for the late reply. The reason I'm cc'ing fop-dev is because,
while such an extension may turn out not to be necessary, it does
again raise interesting questions. Some of them, I cannot confidently
answer ATM, and I'm hop
Glen, you're almost suggesting we have an evil agenda which we use to
make certain things red or blue depending on the renderer. ;-) That's
certainly not the idea behing the extension properties. They are
suggested as a means to tweak the renderer's behaviour, sometimes to
work around a limitation
Manuel Mall wrote:
Extensions specific to a particular renderer and / or extensions which
constitute a rendering hint (e.g. render this image as a grayscale)
should be in a renderer specific namespace.
-0.5. I would be more comfortable with the idea of renderer-specific
formatting objects
gt; >
> > The namespace "http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/extensions"; (common
> > prefix "fox") is reserved for generic extensions to FOP supported
> > across all (e.g. if handled by layout) or most renderers.
> >
> > Extensions specific to a p
On Sat, May 06, 2006 at 11:31:38PM +0800, Manuel Mall wrote:
> I wonder if we should agree on some guidelines for the use of namespaces
> (namespace prefixes) for extensions. I am thinking along the following
> lines:
>
> The namespace "http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/
I wonder if we should agree on some guidelines for the use of namespaces
(namespace prefixes) for extensions. I am thinking along the following
lines:
The namespace "http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/extensions"; (common
prefix "fox") is reserved for generic extensions to F
14 matches
Mail list logo
