xmlgraphics-fop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig Ringer <ring...@ringerc.id.au>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Merge Temp_URI_Unification
Date Thu, 05 Jul 2012 07:01:37 GMT
On 07/05/2012 02:41 PM, mehdi houshmand wrote:
> Hi Chris/Glenn/Anyone else,
>
> You say command-line options should override the fop.xconf values, 
> which makes sense. But should not-given command-line options override 
> fop.xconf values too? Bare with me here, there is sense in the folly 
> of that sentence. Ok, so let's take the example above, with strict FO 
> validation, from the command line you have two options:
>
> 1) fop -r ... <other args>
>
> or
>
> 2) fop ... <other args>
>
> Obviously in option 1, you'd want strict FO validation to be invoked, 
> regardless of what's in the fop conf. But how do we treat option 2? 
> We're not explicitly telling it NOT to validate strictly, so how would 
> a user expect FOP to behave?

Unless an explicitly negating command-line option is specified, it 
should use the configuration. If you want a way to override a setting 
that's turned on in configuration, there needs to be a command-line 
syntax for negating options. Common ways programs do that are:

'n' prefix, eg:

   -nr

'+' for negation (ick!):

    fop +r

pre-fix negation argument that negates the next argument:

    fop -n -r
    fop '!' -r

case:

    fop -R

--
Craig Ringer

Mime
View raw message