At 08:17 AM 7/25/01 -0500, Weiqi Gao wrote:
>Unfortunately, there is no faster XSL-FO transformers that we can
>substitute FOP with (the eval version of The Other FO processor---I
>don't want to mention names to make you cross either---seems to be even
>slower than FOP at certain inputs).

Feel free, I don't think it'll hurt any feelings. :-) I make a practise of 
using PassiveTeX, AntennaHouse XSLFormatter and RenderX XEP, just so I can 
get a feel for what the consensus is on formatting and rendering things 
where the spec allows leeway. The www-xsl-fo list has implementors from all 
the processors participating. And certainly implementors sometimes share 
private communications. There is plenty of room for competition.

To date I haven't noticed that FOP is slower than the other processors. If 
anything it is often somewhat faster (subjective impression, I'll admit). I 
think at this point even the most mature formatters are still more concerned 
with feature support than they are with speed (memory usage being another 
matter entirely, of course).

Arved Sandstrom

Fairly Senior Software Type
e-plicity (
Wireless * B2B * J2EE * XML --- Halifax, Nova Scotia

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to