You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org by Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org> on 2003/01/10 15:45:11 UTC
[PATCH] doc validation fix
Hi,
Running 'forrest validate' on CVS head, I get:
validate-xdocs:
/home/jeff/apache/xml/xml-fop/src/documentation/content/xdocs/design/alt.design/properties/enumerated-values.xml:211:63:
Element type "code." must be declared.
/home/jeff/apache/xml/xml-fop/src/documentation/content/xdocs/design/alt.design/properties/enumerated-values.xml:212:44:
The element type "code." must be terminated by the matching end-tag
"</code.>".
Attached patch fixes this, and cleans up enumerated-values.xml a bit.
Also, I've just modified Forrest so that the
xml-fop/src/documentation/forrest.diff patch is no longer necessary. To
achieve the same effect, the second attached patch adds this to
src/documentation/skinconf.xml:
+ <credit role="pdf">
+ <name>Created by: FOP 1.0dev</name>
+ <url>http://xml.apache.org/fop/dev</url>
+ 
+ <width>138</width>
+ <height>31</height>
+ </credit>
The image, width and height fields are unused, but I put them there so
users with pre-patched Forrests (which don't know about @role) don't get
a broken link on the HTML front-page.
--Jeff
Re: FOP logo
Posted by "Peter B. West" <pb...@powerup.com.au>.
Ralph LaChance wrote:
> At 04:34 PM 1/13/03, you wrote:
>
>>> Maybe. But IMHO the letters "FOP" should be easily readable and the
>>> whole logo shouldn't be too overloaded with additional stuff.
>>
>>
>> Yes, but that still leaves quite a bit of room for font experimentation.
>
>
>
> I cannot resist -
>
> How many programmers does it take to change a logo ? |;^)
>
NaN
> In theory, there is no difference between
> theory and practice, but in practice there is.
>
> (Jan L.A. van de Snepsheut (1953-1994), late of CalTech)
You've found the attribution. One of my favourites.
Peter
--
Peter B. West pbwest@powerup.com.au http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/
"Lord, to whom shall we go?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: FOP logo
Posted by Ralph LaChance <Ra...@compuserve.com>.
At 04:34 PM 1/13/03, you wrote:
>>Maybe. But IMHO the letters "FOP" should be easily readable and the whole
>>logo shouldn't be too overloaded with additional stuff.
>
>Yes, but that still leaves quite a bit of room for font experimentation.
I cannot resist -
How many programmers does it take to change a logo ? |;^)
' Best,
-Ralph LaChance
In theory, there is no difference between
theory and practice, but in practice there is.
(Jan L.A. van de Snepsheut (1953-1994), late of CalTech)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: FOP logo
Posted by "Peter B. West" <pb...@powerup.com.au>.
Bernd Brandstetter wrote:
> On Monday 13 January 2003 11:01, Oleg Tkachenko wrote:
>
>>Bernd Brandstetter wrote:
>>
>>>feeling inspired by your's and Oleg's suggestions and also a little
>>>bit bored this Sunday afternoon, I thought I'll take the chance and
>>>improve my Gimping skills. Here's the result :-)
>>
>>Not bad. Something like this I meant. But (sorry for being critical,
>>it's art, not coding :): why it's sitting back to us.
>
>
> No problem :-)
> This was in no way meant to be a serious proposal for the logo.
>
> I've also created one with a parrot sitting with it's front to us.
> However, I found this one with it's impish look back over the shoulder much
> nicer.
>
I agree. It's more interesting that way.
>
>>F and P are too simple.
>
>
> Maybe. But IMHO the letters "FOP" should be easily readable and the whole
> logo shouldn't be too overloaded with additional stuff.
>
Yes, but that still leaves quite a bit of room for font experimentation.
Peter
--
Peter B. West pbwest@powerup.com.au http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/
"Lord, to whom shall we go?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: FOP logo
Posted by Bernd Brandstetter <bb...@freenet.de>.
On Monday 13 January 2003 11:01, Oleg Tkachenko wrote:
> Bernd Brandstetter wrote:
> > feeling inspired by your's and Oleg's suggestions and also a little
> > bit bored this Sunday afternoon, I thought I'll take the chance and
> > improve my Gimping skills. Here's the result :-)
>
> Not bad. Something like this I meant. But (sorry for being critical,
> it's art, not coding :): why it's sitting back to us.
No problem :-)
This was in no way meant to be a serious proposal for the logo.
I've also created one with a parrot sitting with it's front to us.
However, I found this one with it's impish look back over the shoulder much
nicer.
> F and P are too simple.
Maybe. But IMHO the letters "FOP" should be easily readable and the whole
logo shouldn't be too overloaded with additional stuff.
> And I'm not sure about scalability - e.g. how it'll look 3cmX2cm?
A vector graphic (preferrably SVG) would of course be better. However, I
couldn't find a good-looking vectorized parrot clipart.
Regards,
Bernd
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: FOP logo
Posted by Oleg Tkachenko <ol...@multiconn.com>.
Bernd Brandstetter wrote:
> feeling inspired by your's and Oleg's suggestions and also a little bit
> bored this Sunday afternoon, I thought I'll take the chance and improve my
> Gimping skills. Here's the result :-)
Not bad. Something like this I meant. But (sorry for being critical, it's art,
not coding :): why it's sitting back to us. F and P are too simple. And I'm
not sure about scalability - e.g. how it'll look 3cmX2cm?
--
Oleg Tkachenko
eXperanto team
Multiconn Technologies, Israel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: FOP logo
Posted by Bernd Brandstetter <bb...@freenet.de>.
On Sunday 12 January 2003 01:35, Peter B. West wrote:
> Clare's designs (see previous post) were based on a quill inking in the
> "P" in a large "FOP" on a page which also contained Chancery-stle text
> in a smaller font. The quill was originally supposed to be a connection
> with the Apache feather, but apparently that particular feather "didn't
> work", and the Apache colours were too garish.
Hi,
feeling inspired by your's and Oleg's suggestions and also a little bit
bored this Sunday afternoon, I thought I'll take the chance and improve my
Gimping skills. Here's the result :-)
Best regards,
Bernd
Re: FOP logo
Posted by "Peter B. West" <pb...@powerup.com.au>.
J.Pietschmann wrote:
> Oleg Tkachenko wrote:
>
>> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>>
>>> - Do we like our current logo? :-)
>
> Uh!
>
>> Should admit I spent a couple of hours trying to implement my ideas
>> about the logo (leading motifs were medieval typographic dropcaps and
>> a parrot as (imho) the most foppish animal) but I'm too bad artist and
>> the results were too ugly :)
>
>
> What about a TeX-parody?
> +--- +--\
> | | |
> +-- /--\ +--/
> | | | |
> | | | |
> | |
> \--/
>
> Colored as the current logo, or more in shades like the
> Apache feather? (feather - part of a parrot - hmm)
Clare's designs (see previous post) were based on a quill inking in the
"P" in a large "FOP" on a page which also contained Chancery-stle text
in a smaller font. The quill was originally supposed to be a connection
with the Apache feather, but apparently that particular feather "didn't
work", and the Apache colours were too garish.
Peter
--
Peter B. West pbwest@powerup.com.au http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/
"Lord, to whom shall we go?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
the logo (Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix)
Posted by Oleg Tkachenko <ol...@multiconn.com>.
J.Pietschmann wrote:
> What about a TeX-parody?
> +--- +--\
> | | |
> +-- /--\ +--/
> | | | |
> | | | |
> | |
> \--/
Not bad, but what does it mean? (And does logo should mean anything?) :)
> Colored as the current logo, or more in shades like the
> Apache feather? (feather - part of a parrot - hmm)
I've been imagining F and P as fancy dropcaps and/or a little o with a
parrot sitting on it, colored or just outlined (something like this one
[1]). Anyway each of us has a great imagination, but we need real logos
to choose and why not to make a contest? It's kind of PR after all.
[1] http://www.nyc-poly.org/Poly%20parrot.gif
--
Oleg Tkachenko
eXperanto team
Multiconn Technologies, Israel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by "J.Pietschmann" <j3...@yahoo.de>.
Oleg Tkachenko wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>> - Do we like our current logo? :-)
Uh!
> Should admit I spent a couple of
> hours trying to implement my ideas about the logo (leading motifs were
> medieval typographic dropcaps and a parrot as (imho) the most foppish
> animal) but I'm too bad artist and the results were too ugly :)
What about a TeX-parody?
+--- +--\
| | |
+-- /--\ +--/
| | | |
| | | |
| |
\--/
Colored as the current logo, or more in shades like the
Apache feather? (feather - part of a parrot - hmm)
J.Pietschmann
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: FOP logo
Posted by Oleg Tkachenko <ol...@multiconn.com>.
Peter B. West wrote:
> I mentioned the need for a logo some months ago to an acquaintance of
> mine who is a graphics design student. She came up with some
> interesting ideas, but they were incomplete the last time I spoke to her
> (just before Christmas.) I will try to get in touch with her again, and
> get her to post some of her sketches for comment.
Well, a jury is waiting :)
--
Oleg Tkachenko
eXperanto team
Multiconn Technologies, Israel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
FOP logo
Posted by "Peter B. West" <pb...@powerup.com.au>.
Oleg Tkachenko wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>
>> - Do we like our current logo? :-)
>
> That's a big question actually :) afair Keiron said the current logo
> should be at least brighten to fit forrest-ed site design better or
> suggested to make the logo contest. Should admit I spent a couple of
> hours trying to implement my ideas about the logo (leading motifs were
> medieval typographic dropcaps and a parrot as (imho) the most foppish
> animal) but I'm too bad artist and the results were too ugly :)
> My suggestion is to announce the new FOP logo contest in fop-user list
> or broader, like recent Amaya welcome page contest[1] (the winner gets
> bragging rights). Then we can vote among developers or users, how the idea?
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/Amaya/contest.html
I mentioned the need for a logo some months ago to an acquaintance of
mine who is a graphics design student. She came up with some
interesting ideas, but they were incomplete the last time I spoke to her
(just before Christmas.) I will try to get in touch with her again, and
get her to post some of her sketches for comment.
Peter
--
Peter B. West pbwest@powerup.com.au http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/
"Lord, to whom shall we go?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by Oleg Tkachenko <ol...@multiconn.com>.
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> - Do we like our current logo? :-)
That's a big question actually :) afair Keiron said the current logo
should be at least brighten to fit forrest-ed site design better or
suggested to make the logo contest. Should admit I spent a couple of
hours trying to implement my ideas about the logo (leading motifs were
medieval typographic dropcaps and a parrot as (imho) the most foppish
animal) but I'm too bad artist and the results were too ugly :)
My suggestion is to announce the new FOP logo contest in fop-user list
or broader, like recent Amaya welcome page contest[1] (the winner gets
bragging rights). Then we can vote among developers or users, how the idea?
[1] http://www.w3.org/Amaya/contest.html
--
Oleg Tkachenko
eXperanto team
Multiconn Technologies, Israel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch>.
On 12.01.2003 04:59:36 Jeff Turner wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 05:43:37PM +0100, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > Hi Jeff
> >
> > I've applied your patches locally. Thanks. Everything's ok with the
> > first one, but with the second one I'm having problems (not your fault!):
> > - I had to add adjust the inline DTD of skinconf.xml to include the role
> > attribute:
> > <!ELEMENT credit (name, url, image, width?, height?)>
> > <!ATTLIST credit role CDATA #IMPLIED>
>
> Oops yes, sorry. Attached is a fix with DTD mods.
Applied, thanks.
> > - The credit element produces a rather ugly FOP logo.
>
> If you upgrade your Forrest, the logo won't appear[1]. The @role="pdf"
> in skinconf.xml means the credit only applies to PDFs. Earlier versions
> of Forrest didn't know about this, so rather than display a broken image,
> I threw in the current FOP logo.
Ok, I've upgraded Forrest again and the logo disappeared.
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Jan 11, 2003 at 05:43:37PM +0100, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> Hi Jeff
>
> I've applied your patches locally. Thanks. Everything's ok with the
> first one, but with the second one I'm having problems (not your fault!):
> - I had to add adjust the inline DTD of skinconf.xml to include the role
> attribute:
> <!ELEMENT credit (name, url, image, width?, height?)>
> <!ATTLIST credit role CDATA #IMPLIED>
Oops yes, sorry. Attached is a fix with DTD mods.
> - The credit element produces a rather ugly FOP logo.
If you upgrade your Forrest, the logo won't appear[1]. The @role="pdf"
in skinconf.xml means the credit only applies to PDFs. Earlier versions
of Forrest didn't know about this, so rather than display a broken image,
I threw in the current FOP logo.
--Jeff
[1] See http://forrestbot.cocoondev.org/sites/xml-fop/ (after applying
the patch)
> But that's probably more a FOP-internal thing. We probably need a
> customized little image for this. It should probably be something like:
> PDFs generated with
> <logo> F O P
>
> Questions:
> - Does anyone have the original logo (AI, CorelDraw, SVG etc.)??? I
> haven't found it anywhere.
> - Do we like our current logo? :-)
>
> I've commented out Jeff's credit element for the moment and will commit
> the changes in a minute.
...
Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by Bernd Brandstetter <bb...@freenet.de>.
On Monday 13 January 2003 11:05, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> On 12.01.2003 11:40:57 Bernd Brandstetter wrote:
> > After having tried to understand how fop works by just reading the
> > code for a couple of hours now, FOrtress inevitably comes to my mind
> > ;-) (in the sense of: Not easy to get in, at least for a newbie)
> >
> :-) Unfortunately, Fortress is already taken by the Apache Avalon
>
> project for one their new containers. I bet they wouldn't be happy to
> hear your association with the name.
>
> Let's be serious again: What do you think could be improved to make FOP
> easier to get in?
Design documentation :-)
When I clicked on the "Architecture" and "Design" links, I had expected a
bit more than 20 to 30 lines of text. But I must admit that I have totally
overlooked the "Understanding the design" section which is a bit more
verbose.
Still, it would be nice to have something in the style of the "Alt design"
description - which I think is really great - for the "standard" design
too.
Regards,
Bernd
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch>.
On 12.01.2003 11:40:57 Bernd Brandstetter wrote:
> After having tried to understand how fop works by just reading the code for
> a couple of hours now, FOrtress inevitably comes to my mind ;-)
> (in the sense of: Not easy to get in, at least for a newbie)
:-) Unfortunately, Fortress is already taken by the Apache Avalon
project for one their new containers. I bet they wouldn't be happy to
hear your association with the name.
Let's be serious again: What do you think could be improved to make FOP
easier to get in?
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by Bernd Brandstetter <bb...@freenet.de>.
On Saturday 11 January 2003 20:13, Victor Mote wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> > - Do we like our current logo? :-)
>
> I hope I am not out of line to ask an even more fundamental question --
> do we like our current name? I never have a problem writing it, but when
> speaking it, I cannot make my mouth say "fop", but invariably say
> "eff-oh-pee" instead. Our root "FO" is a FOrtunate or perhaps FOrtuitous
> one, as there are many English words that start with these letters, and
> probably many more that contain them. FOr(r)est might have been good
> (since we seem to work with trees a lot), but is taken. FOrward, FOcus,
> or even FOreword might each work, or efFOrtless (????). How about
> FOliage (with a leaf logo)? Or perhaps a Latin word to reflect our
> international crew -- FOcus (again), or FOrtis, or FOrum. I also like
> Oleg's idea of throwing it out to the user community.
After having tried to understand how fop works by just reading the code for
a couple of hours now, FOrtress inevitably comes to my mind ;-)
(in the sense of: Not easy to get in, at least for a newbie)
Bye,
Bernd
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by "Peter B. West" <pb...@powerup.com.au>.
Victor Mote wrote:
>
> We're OK. I caught your irony. My response was really entirely to Oleg's
> question. However, I really was concerned about offending someone -- things
> like names and logos carry a certain emotional weight.
>
> In other words, I might worry about offending some on this list, but it
> really wouldn't bother me to offend you at all, Peter. VVBG :-)
Touche'.
Peter
--
Peter B. West pbwest@powerup.com.au http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/
"Lord, to whom shall we go?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by Victor Mote <vi...@outfitr.com>.
Peter B. West wrote:
> Re my comment on this, I thought I should warn you that I am addicted to
> ironical jokes, which can be a dangerous habit with email. I dislike
> emoticons, probably because I am more of a snob than I like to admit,
> but also because they seem to me to discourage any attempt either to
> write or to read the subtle - or the ironical! - from email. An
> advantage of the longevity of a forum like this is that we get to know
> each other's style, so I hope that my un-emoticoned attempts at humour
> are read as such. I'll see if I can squeeze one out.
>
> ....,; :) >;,....
We're OK. I caught your irony. My response was really entirely to Oleg's
question. However, I really was concerned about offending someone -- things
like names and logos carry a certain emotional weight.
In other words, I might worry about offending some on this list, but it
really wouldn't bother me to offend you at all, Peter. VVBG :-)
Victor Mote
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by "Peter B. West" <pb...@powerup.com.au>.
Victor Mote wrote:
>
> It must be a cultural thing. The dictionary definition you gave should tell
> the story well enough -- see the example "felt contempt for the mincing
> ...". The word is a pejorative, but perhaps more so in my part of the world,
> where calling someone a "fop" or a "dandy" might be fighting words. In my
> mind it connotes "sissy" on one end of the scale and "big hat, no cattle" on
> the other. This is all partially mitigated by the fact that the word is
> pretty much in disuse, so maybe nobody else knows what it means.
>
> Finding myself in the minority, I withdraw the question. I intended no
> offence. As a workaround, please don't be offended if I continue to treat
> the name as an acronym instead of a word.
Victor,
Re my comment on this, I thought I should warn you that I am addicted to
ironical jokes, which can be a dangerous habit with email. I dislike
emoticons, probably because I am more of a snob than I like to admit,
but also because they seem to me to discourage any attempt either to
write or to read the subtle - or the ironical! - from email. An
advantage of the longevity of a forum like this is that we get to know
each other's style, so I hope that my un-emoticoned attempts at humour
are read as such. I'll see if I can squeeze one out.
....,; :) >;,....
Peter
--
Peter B. West pbwest@powerup.com.au http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/
"Lord, to whom shall we go?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by Victor Mote <vi...@outfitr.com>.
Oleg Tkachenko wrote:
> I like it. First of all "FOP" is well-known among the whole xml
> community for ages (what costs much) and secondly "fop" word has a
Yes, this is the primary consideration. The only reason why I mention it now
at all is that changing such things is always better done sooner rather than
later.
> Entry Word: fop
> Function: noun
> Text: a man who is conspicuously fashionable or elegant in dress or
> appearance <felt contempt for the mincing overdressed fop>
> Synonyms Beau Brummel, blood, buck, coxcomb, dandy, dude, exquisite,
> gallant, lounge lizard, macaroni, petit-maître, popinjay
> Related Word fashion plate, silk stocking; blade, cavalier,
> man-about-town, spark, sport, swell; ladies' man, lady-killer, masher
> Idioms man of the world
>
> I never have a problem writing it, but when
> > speaking it, I cannot make my mouth say "fop", but invariably say
> > "eff-oh-pee" instead.
> May I ask why? (Sorry, after spending the whole day in the beach I'm a
> liitle bit stupid :)
It must be a cultural thing. The dictionary definition you gave should tell
the story well enough -- see the example "felt contempt for the mincing
...". The word is a pejorative, but perhaps more so in my part of the world,
where calling someone a "fop" or a "dandy" might be fighting words. In my
mind it connotes "sissy" on one end of the scale and "big hat, no cattle" on
the other. This is all partially mitigated by the fact that the word is
pretty much in disuse, so maybe nobody else knows what it means.
Finding myself in the minority, I withdraw the question. I intended no
offence. As a workaround, please don't be offended if I continue to treat
the name as an acronym instead of a word.
Victor Mote
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by Oleg Tkachenko <ol...@multiconn.com>.
Victor Mote wrote:
> I hope I am not out of line to ask an even more fundamental question -- do
> we like our current name?
I like it. First of all "FOP" is well-known among the whole xml
community for ages (what costs much) and secondly "fop" word has a
meaning itself wrt eXtensible stylesheet language. The Webster says
about "fop":
Entry Word: fop
Function: noun
Text: a man who is conspicuously fashionable or elegant in dress or
appearance <felt contempt for the mincing overdressed fop>
Synonyms Beau Brummel, blood, buck, coxcomb, dandy, dude, exquisite,
gallant, lounge lizard, macaroni, petit-maître, popinjay
Related Word fashion plate, silk stocking; blade, cavalier,
man-about-town, spark, sport, swell; ladies' man, lady-killer, masher
Idioms man of the world
I never have a problem writing it, but when
> speaking it, I cannot make my mouth say "fop", but invariably say
> "eff-oh-pee" instead.
May I ask why? (Sorry, after spending the whole day in the beach I'm a
liitle bit stupid :)
--
Oleg Tkachenko
eXperanto team
Multiconn Technologies, Israel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by "Peter B. West" <pb...@powerup.com.au>.
Victor Mote wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>
>
>>- Do we like our current logo? :-)
>
>
> I hope I am not out of line to ask an even more fundamental question -- do
> we like our current name? I never have a problem writing it, but when
> speaking it, I cannot make my mouth say "fop", but invariably say
> "eff-oh-pee" instead.
Heresy! Victor, the stigma that once attached to consulting a speech
therapist has almost vanished now. I'm sure something can be done, and
our best wishes will go with you.
Peter
--
Peter B. West pbwest@powerup.com.au http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/
"Lord, to whom shall we go?"
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by Victor Mote <vi...@outfitr.com>.
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> - Do we like our current logo? :-)
I hope I am not out of line to ask an even more fundamental question -- do
we like our current name? I never have a problem writing it, but when
speaking it, I cannot make my mouth say "fop", but invariably say
"eff-oh-pee" instead. Our root "FO" is a FOrtunate or perhaps FOrtuitous
one, as there are many English words that start with these letters, and
probably many more that contain them. FOr(r)est might have been good (since
we seem to work with trees a lot), but is taken. FOrward, FOcus, or even
FOreword might each work, or efFOrtless (????). How about FOliage (with a
leaf logo)? Or perhaps a Latin word to reflect our international crew --
FOcus (again), or FOrtis, or FOrum. I also like Oleg's idea of throwing it
out to the user community.
If we wanted to make a change, it will be easier now than after a 1.0
release. There are certainly drawbacks even now. I don't strongly dislike
the current name, but it would have been far down my list (below FOist and
FOghorn, above FOlly, FOreclose, and FOrgery). I realize that old-timers
especially might not like the idea of changing. So I apologize in advance
for raising the issue, but I think it better to do so now than later.
Now, I need to answer Jeremias' FOnt questions.
Victor Mote
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch>.
Hi Jeff
I've applied your patches locally. Thanks. Everything's ok with the
first one, but with the second one I'm having problems (not your fault!):
- I had to add adjust the inline DTD of skinconf.xml to include the role
attribute:
<!ELEMENT credit (name, url, image, width?, height?)>
<!ATTLIST credit role CDATA #IMPLIED>
- The credit element produces a rather ugly FOP logo. But that's
probably more a FOP-internal thing. We probably need a customized
little image for this. It should probably be something like:
PDFs generated with
<logo> F O P
Questions:
- Does anyone have the original logo (AI, CorelDraw, SVG etc.)??? I
haven't found it anywhere.
- Do we like our current logo? :-)
I've commented out Jeff's credit element for the moment and will commit
the changes in a minute.
On 10.01.2003 15:45:11 Jeff Turner wrote:
> Running 'forrest validate' on CVS head, I get:
>
> validate-xdocs:
> /home/jeff/apache/xml/xml-fop/src/documentation/content/xdocs/design/alt.design/properties/enumerated-values.xml:211:63:
> Element type "code." must be declared.
> /home/jeff/apache/xml/xml-fop/src/documentation/content/xdocs/design/alt.design/properties/enumerated-values.xml:212:44:
> The element type "code." must be terminated by the matching end-tag
> "</code.>".
>
> Attached patch fixes this, and cleans up enumerated-values.xml a bit.
>
> Also, I've just modified Forrest so that the
> xml-fop/src/documentation/forrest.diff patch is no longer necessary. To
> achieve the same effect, the second attached patch adds this to
> src/documentation/skinconf.xml:
>
> + <credit role="pdf">
> + <name>Created by: FOP 1.0dev</name>
> + <url>http://xml.apache.org/fop/dev</url>
> + 
> + <width>138</width>
> + <height>31</height>
> + </credit>
>
> The image, width and height fields are unused, but I put them there so
> users with pre-patched Forrests (which don't know about @role) don't get
> a broken link on the HTML front-page.
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org