RE: release of FOP

["Didier PH Martin" <martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi James

This is a good idea, we can start with FOP, follow the evolution of the
specs then port it to C++. Sound like a reasonable scenario.

regards
Didier PH Martin
mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.netfolder.com

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of James Tauber
Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 8:51 AM
To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: release of FOP


> to include FOP into Mozilla, we need the following steps:
>
> a) make a C/C++ version and package it as a XPCOM module

I would suggest that it is too early to do that. XSL is still too much of a
moving target and not enough of it has been implemented in FOP anyway yet. I
would suggest effort would be better spent helping to get FOP to support
more of the current XSL draft and *then* think about porting it.

James


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list