xmlgraphics-fop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeremias Maerki <dev.jerem...@greenmail.ch>
Subject Re: FOP Compliance Page was: getPageCount and FOP 1.0dev
Date Tue, 02 Aug 2005 08:49:21 GMT
I agree with Victor. The conformance level is uninteresting for most
people anyway, and we can't currently claim full support for any
particular conformance level. It's all a big mix.

Keep it as simple as possible to get fast results. If we want something
more sophisticated we can do that later. Also keep in mind that we have
full history on the repository.

I think the "objects" section in Manuel's demo site is good enough for
now. The only issue I see are the comments. Comments will need to be
marked for which version they apply. But we can do that with a simple

BTW, I think with the next Forrest version we will have much more
freedom do design that page. I've talked to Forrest people at ApacheCon
and the stuff to come sounds very interesting.

On 02.08.2005 04:00:01 Victor Mote wrote:
> Manuel Mall wrote:
> > I managed to revive the color coding (see 
> > http://www.arcus.com.au/fop/compliance.html). It was a CSS 
> > issue in that the FOP custom stylesheet rules were less 
> > specific than the Forrest default CSS rules and therefore not 
> > applied on the table elements.
> The original intent is seen in the properties section there, but not in the
> objects (which you have adapted to the new scheme). The color coding in
> objects is useful also, just in a different way. The original idea was
> intended somewhat as a benefit to developers, almost a checklist. I probably
> did not fully grasp at the time that 0.20.5 had been completely abandoned.
> With that in mind, abandoning the basic / extended / complete information in
> favor of the progression between the two releases is  probably good, since
> you only have 2 dimensions on the page to work with. And the user can still
> infer the same information from the data presented, it just won't be as
> visually obvious.
> Victor Mote

Jeremias Maerki

View raw message