xmlgraphics-fop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Victor Mote" <...@outfitr.com>
Subject RE: page-position="last" - bug?
Date Thu, 10 Apr 2003 14:51:39 GMT
Marcelo Jaccoud Amaral wrote:

> I just pointed out that in this case, the word 'implementation' is more
> adequate than 'compliance'. Of course we should distinguish full and
> partially implemented features, and don't forget to mark the extensions
> too.

The distinction that you make is a useful one, and I had to go look at the
document to be sure of the wording. In the document, we have used "support"
to describe the individual line items. We use "compliance" to describe the
standard as a whole, and I think we adequately show that we are not yet
compliant with the standard. Extensions and other extras are documented on
separate pages. IMO, we have used the right words to describe what is going
on. Really, the yes/no/partial describes /implementation/ (this is implied,
but not documented), and the color coding describes /support/ at the given
level of compliance (this is documented). I don't think there should be any
confusion about what is going on, but I'll be glad to clarify the doc if you
disagree.

Victor Mote


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org


Mime
View raw message