FW: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/pagination Root.java

["Andreas L. Delmelle" <a_...@pandora.be>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: adelmelle@apache.org [mailto:adelmelle@apache.org]
>

Hi,

>   Modified:    src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/pagination Root.java
>   Log:
>   changed 'bookmarks' to 'outline' to avoid ValidateException for
> bookmarks extension
>

Hope the use of the bookmarks extension wasn't meant to be changed in HEAD.
If so, I'll revert to the original. Just got an error running some test
files, hence the change...

Greetz,

Andreas

RE: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/pagination Root.java

["Andreas L. Delmelle" <a_...@pandora.be>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Glen Mazza [mailto:grm7793@yahoo.com]
>
> 1.0's bookmarks are different from 0.20.5's, the former has
> fox:bookmarks as the "parent" element.
> It's been that way in 1.0 for a long time,
> before I came on board I believe.
>

Yes, and it even has been discussed this summer. Silly me forgot to check
the archives *before* changing and committing :-)

>
> I don't like the nomenclature we have in FOP 1.0 that much.
> fox:outline comes from the PDF specification's term for a
> bookmark, but the PDF spec calls it an "outline item",
> and fox:bookmarks (parent level, holding all the outline
> items) IIRC is called a "document outline" in the PDF
> spec.  I guess fox:bookmarks (top-level), and fox:bookmark(child
> elements) might be better, but better enough to warran switching
> what we currently have?  I'm unsure.

Well, some consistency would indeed look prettier, i.e.
   fox:bookmarks / fox:bookmark
or fox:outlines / fox:outline
or (more verbose) fox:document-outline / fox:outline-item

But for now, I think I can live with it.

Greetz,

Andreas

Re: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/pagination Root.java

[Glen Mazza <gr...@yahoo.com>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andreas L. Delmelle" <a_...@pandora.be>
To: <fo...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 2:58 PM
Subject: RE: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/pagination
Root.java


> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andreas L. Delmelle [mailto:a_l.delmelle@pandora.be]
> >
> <snip />
> > Hope the use of the bookmarks extension wasn't meant to be
> > changed in HEAD.
>
> Oops. Just noticed that a Bookmarks class has been added to the extensions
> package...
>

1.0's bookmarks are different from 0.20.5's, the former has fox:bookmarks as
the "parent" element.  It's been that way in 1.0 for a long time, before I
came on board I believe.


> What's going to be the prescribed usage pattern for it?
> Is it going to be:
> &lt;fox:bookmark>
>   &lt;fox:outline internal-destination="...">
>     &lt;fox:label>...&lt;/fox:label>
>   ...
>   &lt;/fox-outline>
> &lt;/fox:bookmark>
>
> Seems rather awkward, since one fox:bookmark can contain the whole set of
> bookmarks for the entire document (?)
>

I don't like the nomenclature we have in FOP 1.0 that much.  fox:outline
comes from the PDF specification's term for a bookmark, but the PDF spec
calls it an "outline item", and fox:bookmarks (parent level, holding all the
outline items) IIRC is called a "document outline" in the PDF spec.  I guess
fox:bookmarks (top-level), and fox:bookmark(child elements) might be better,
but better enough to warran switching what we currently have?  I'm unsure.

Glen

RE: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/pagination Root.java

["Andreas L. Delmelle" <a_...@pandora.be>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas L. Delmelle [mailto:a_l.delmelle@pandora.be]


Ignore this thread. Found the answer in the archives...

Sorry for the nuisance.

Greetz,

Andreas

RE: cvs commit: xml-fop/src/java/org/apache/fop/fo/pagination Root.java

["Andreas L. Delmelle" <a_...@pandora.be>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas L. Delmelle [mailto:a_l.delmelle@pandora.be]
>
<snip />
> Hope the use of the bookmarks extension wasn't meant to be
> changed in HEAD.

Oops. Just noticed that a Bookmarks class has been added to the extensions
package...

What's going to be the prescribed usage pattern for it?
Is it going to be:
&lt;fox:bookmark>
  &lt;fox:outline internal-destination="...">
    &lt;fox:label>...&lt;/fox:label>
  ...
  &lt;/fox-outline>
&lt;/fox:bookmark>

Seems rather awkward, since one fox:bookmark can contain the whole set of
bookmarks for the entire document (?)

> If so, I'll revert to the original. Just got an error running some test
> files, hence the change...

Just yell if you want me to change (or DIY if you insist :-) )

Greetz,

Andreas