I guess it's up to the individual.

Ant is the answer to your comment about using batch/shell scripts. It is
written in Java so it's portable and can be built so classpaths are not
necessary; they are built by Ant as part of the build process.  There's
still a learning curve but it's less steep than having to learn both shell
and batch file syntaxes. There are also ways to incorporate non-Java based
tools to a system like Ant to be run alongside Java programs like xmllint,
and fop.  This is how I run xsltproc in my Java toolchain.

Perhaps Dave Pawson's setup guide (http://dpawson.co.uk/docbook/setup/) is a
good starting point for people wanting to build/explore the different
options. It still requires a learning curve but hopefully it's less steep
than having to learn it from scratch. It can be further extended with
examples of how can you incorporate non-Java tools into the tool-chain.

2010/3/3 Remko Tronçon <[email protected]>

> Hi,
>
> > There are 2 steps to producing PDF from Docbook XML.
>
> Right, and that's what I've been doing for years. However, my point
> was that, although I didn't measure it yet, I expect a lot of the lost
> time in processing to be due to the overhead of starting a java VM. If
> I'm going to start the VM anyway, the time lost by using a complete
> java-based toolchain is probably a lot smaller. It also removes some
> overhead by only parsing your document once, and taking it through the
> whole conversion chain without re-parsing (although parsing is quite
> fast).
>
> Another aspect is the usability: using a toolchain based on
> command-line tools like xsltproc etc. may be acceptable for the people
> who know their way around shells, make, ..., but it's not for 'normal'
> people. Building an integrated toolchain based on shell tools in a
> maintainable way is pretty hard on operating systems like Windows.
> That's where the Java tools come in handy: you can easily build one
> usable, cross-platform toolchain. I think that outweighs the
> performance hit for most people.
>
> Now, if there would be a good native FO to PDF alternative, this story
> would change: you could build a complete native toolchain by linking
> against these other processors.
>
> cheers,
> Remko
>

Reply via email to