Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 46069 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2004 13:03:08 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 24 Nov 2004 13:03:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 39349 invoked by uid 500); 24 Nov 2004 13:03:04 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 39298 invoked by uid 500); 24 Nov 2004 13:03:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 39277 invoked by uid 99); 24 Nov 2004 13:03:04 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from viefep18-int.chello.at (HELO viefep18-int.chello.at) (213.46.255.21) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 05:03:01 -0800 Received: from [192.168.1.31] (really [62.178.239.20]) by viefep11-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.6.01.03.05 201-2131-111-107-20040910) with ESMTP id <20041124125944.SKJO15300.viefep11-int.chello.at@[192.168.1.31]> for ; Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:59:44 +0100 Message-ID: <41A485BB.9050104@apache.org> Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:59:39 +0100 From: Reinhard Poetz User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Subject: FormsGenerator vs FormsTransformer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Just wondering why in the examples always the FormsTransformer is used although the use of the FormsGenerator is possible. Does this have a special reason? -- Reinhard