mmm wrong info, you might be confused by another project call REXP.
RenderX is a commercial tool that is not slower nor faster than FOP in absolute. It depends on the complexity of your document and on the FO feature you are using.
Fop is easy to use, REC compliant and fast for non web large document. It is also open sourced and free. It also support SVG through Batik ! Tons of good points :))
RenderX has more FO feature implemented regarding the current spec, also it is sometimes under FOP regarding some (long tables).
What is the choice ? All FO processor have memory consumption issues. The weak point.
As for me Fop is the answer even though RenderX team has done some nice job.
At 14:23 03/04/2002 +0100, you wrote:
Last time I looked at RenderX, I think I saw something that stated or implied that RenderX used FOP or was based on it, hence RenderX is essentially a layer on top of FOP and so will be slower.
It might be worth checking.
-----Original Message----- From: Irina Grigorieva [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 03 April 2002 14:11 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: FOP performance vs RenderX performance
My apologies if this question has already been discussed or does not fit the forum topic. I try to compare performance of FOP and RenderX, but all I have found out is that FOP formats much faster than RenderX (evaluation version). Unfortunately, RenderX evaluation accepts input/produces output only in file format (filenames as input) and there is no capability to count the actual time of rendering, but the time values is very frustrating.:-( However, I expected RenderX as a commercial product to be more advanced in the speed of processing. Have I missed something important?
Can anyone help me? Thanks in advance.