On 26/03/2014 2:59 PM, Jan Tosovsky wrote:
On 2014-03-26 Christopher R. Maden wrote:
Although I don’t get a vote, I completely agree with Glenn that DITA
integration into FOP is completely inappropriate.
+1
FOP consumes standardized XSL-FO.
DITA-OT should produce standardized XSL-FO. Period ;-)
It does but FOP does not support all PDF features so some of the things
that people can express in DITA's XML can not produce the PDF output
that people want/need.
>From my POV it has nothing to do with FOP, it is rather XSLT (or whatever)
part.
But I agree FOP could be enhanced to be more conformant to the standard. It requires engaging developers and sponsors.
I would hope that engaging the DITA community that has the need and the
resources will get the support for these features.
The separation into tool-making and document making communities makes it
harder for the tool guys to get funded or staffed.
The document makers don't have the knowhow to fix the tools.
There is a lot of potential locked up in the current situation.
Some ideas appear in this mailing list from time to time.
The DITA community has not been very good at pestering the FOP team to
get things fixed.
They have tended to accept that FOP is static and can not respond to the
needs of the document makers.
Jan
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
