Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XSL-FO] Formatting Objects considered harmful (Was: Using an XSL Formatt...

Expand Messages
  • AndrewWatt2001@aol.com
    In a message dated 19/02/01 17:59:23 GMT Standard Time, howcome@opera.com ... Hakon, Your conclusion on this matter is no better founded than your conclusion
    Message 1 of 7 , Feb 19, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 19/02/01 17:59:23 GMT Standard Time, howcome@...
      writes:


      Try [1].

      According to the XSL-FO mailing list archives, you spent a maximum of
      17 minutes reading my first email message [2], downloading the first
      document [3], reading the document, and writing your response [4].
      Feel free to spend more time on [1] :-)

      [1] http://www.myopera.com/people/howcome/2000/PODDP/
      [2] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/XSL-FO/message/219
      [3] http://www.opera.com/people/howcome/1999/foch.html
      [4] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/XSL-FO/message/220


      Hakon,

      Your conclusion on this matter is no better founded than your conclusion
      regarding XSL-FO being allegedly harmful.

      Max Froumentin drew my attention several days ago to your opinion piece at
      [3] above.

      Last night I simply checked to see if you had updated it (you hadn't) or
      corrected any of the factual errrors in it (you hadn't).

      I was unimpressed by your opinion piece the first time I read it and spotted
      the errors in it. I see no reason, so far, to change my view.

      Andrew Watt
    • Ed Nixon
      At 05:46 PM 19/02/2001 -0500, AndrewWatt2001@aol.com wrote: I was unimpressed by your opinion piece the first time I read it and spotted ... Andrew, I can t
      Message 2 of 7 , Feb 19, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        At 05:46 PM 19/02/2001 -0500, AndrewWatt2001@... wrote:
        I was unimpressed by your opinion piece the first time I read it and spotted
        >the errors in it. I see no reason, so far, to change my view.

        Andrew, I can't say I've been as riveted to this exchange as I could have
        been (say, the first time around 6 or 12 months ago) but I don't recall
        your itemizing the errors or proposing alternative views. If I missed your
        reasoned response, I'd be grateful if you could review it quickly for me
        either via the list or off-line.

        On the other hand if you are still reacting to the remark about smoking...
        whatever that came in Hakon's first response to your (rather dated) item on
        Antenna House, it may have been an attempt at humour that didn't make it
        across the Atlantic Ocean or the idiomatic gap between Scandinavian and
        North American versions of English. No need for prolonged heat and smoke

        Finally, if there is some other antecedent reason for the smoke, I'd
        suggest it be taken off line and buried somewhere in the bit bucket.

        Regards. ...edN
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.