I haven't followed this thread, but I have to agree with Chris Madden that a numeric character reference in XML must always mean a Unicode code value. If FOP is doing something different, then it is broken w.r.t. XML semantics.
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Chris <bowditch_ch...@hotmail.com> wrote: > I'm finding your tone pretty aggressive, but will attempt to answer > despite that... > > Since Fonts vendors can build the codepages anyway they choose, we > cannot simply build a static map that takes Unicode and maps to any > custom codepage. Thus the user must specify non standard code points or > build/acquire other fonts > > This is a legacy of 1970s AFP technology. There is a codepage titled > T111200 in AFP land that can be acquired to meet the requirement of > keeping the codepoints Unicode for AFP output. I've spoken to a couple > of fonts vendors about building fonts for that code page. There are > partial fonts in existence that do provide Glyphs for part of the > Unicode range, but building a complete one is a mammoth task and they > were quoting six figure $ sums to do so. > > Unless the OP has such a font, then the solution using his current > Characterset and Codepage is to use the codepoint x55 > > Thanks, > > Chris > > On 26/09/2017 20:50, Christopher R. Maden wrote: > > On 09/26/2017 11:08 AM, Chris Bowditch (JIRA) wrote: > >> > >> [ > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-2741?page=com. > atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment- > tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16180912#comment-16180912 > >> ] > >> > >> Chris Bowditch commented on FOP-2741: > >> ------------------------------------- > >> > >> The solution is to insert code point x55 into the XSL-FO, e.g. > > > > (Taking the discussion out of JIRA...) > > > > I disagree with this pretty vigorously. > > > > The numeric character references in XML are *ALWAYS* to Unicode. > > 3 is an exclamation point; U is a capital Latin U. The fact > > that AFP has a different encoding is a problem for the output system > > to handle, not for the user to deal with. Your proposed solution > > would mean different input FO-XML for different outputs, which is > > against the whole point of XSL. > > > > ~Chris > > >