[Happy Independence Day fellow Americans!] Editors, One more 1.1 WD CM suggestion (just editorial here)-- the constraints defined within fo:marker and fo:retrieve-marker prohibit these FO's from being descendants of fo:static-content and fo:flow, respectively. I think it would be very helpful for the implementor if these two rules were copied (or moved) to the CM definitions of the parent fo:flow and fo:static-content FO's. I originally missed implementing enforcement of these rules for fo:flow and fo:s-c in FOP, because they were missing from these FO's CM definitions. For almost all of the formatting objects, the content model is fully defined in the CM for that formatting object--i.e., it is not necessary to do a full scan of the XSL specification in order to determine the actual CM of a formatting object. This saves sanity on the part of the implementor, and also adheres to the idea normally held by the recommendation that the parent FO defines its CM, rather than having child FO's determine their legal parents. Regards, Glen ____________________________________________________ Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.comReceived on Monday, 4 July 2005 14:50:26 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:58 GMT