FWIW IMO, here's a couple things:
FOP -- Free
XEP -- >= ~$5,000
Antenna -- >= ~$1,900
PassiveTex -- don't know

FOP -- source - you can modify it / contribute to this, imho, excellent
project if you want (or have ability) to
XEP -- nope
Antenna -- nope
PassiveTex -- don't know

FOP -- support only if someone has an interest or ability to answer your
questions (many peoples questions just slide through the cracks it seems);
change lists and documentation spotty;  releases not as frequent and
development group not as active as other Apache projects.
XEP -- good support (because of the pricetag, they feel more obligated?)
Antenna -- don't know
PassiveTex -- don't know

   Matthew L. Avizinis <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gleim Publications, Inc.
   4201 NW 95th Blvd.
 Gainesville, FL 32606
(352)-375-0772 ext. 101
      www.gleim.com <http://www.gleim.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: GISBERT Aurélien (DSIT-EX) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 5:38 AM
> Subject: TR: Choice of a XSL-Fo processor
> I have to do a comparison between the different existing XSL-Fo
> processors.
> I focused on these ones:
> -FOP, Apache
> -XEP, RenderX
> -Antenna House XSL Processor
> -PassiveTeX
> Could you give me their "good and bad parts"?
> Who support them?
> What are the aims of each one about the XSL specification?
> Finally, is there any other good XSL-Fo processors?
> I understood that these 4 XSL-Fo processors were all compliant to
> the basic
> conformance level in the W3C recommendation, and also to some of
> the objects
> and properties of the extended level.
> I would like to have your opinions. I have to transform an XML
> document into
> a PDF file, using a specific model of presentation (first page, contents,
> headers, titles, ...)
> Regards
> -----------------------
> Aurelien Gisbert
> Engineer student in the INSA of Lyon, France
> Internee in the SNCF, France (working with Alain Herbuel, in the DSIT-EX
> section)

Reply via email to