Many non-trivial fo files will not work on the development version, even including several of our own examples. It is still very much a work in progress. We try to fix the issues as we encounter them, and over time, more and more of them become functional.
Glen --- Johannes Franz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ok, i created a fo file, with a preprocessor from > xml+xsl. Now i tried: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/xml-fop> ./fop.sh protocol.fo -rtf > bittebitte.rtf > > and get the following error message: > > 16.06.2004 18:18:54 org.apache.fop.apps.Fop main > INFO: 1.0dev > Exception in thread "main" > java.lang.NullPointerException > at > org.apache.fop.apps.Driver.render(Driver.java:544) > at org.apache.fop.apps.Fop.main(Fop.java:71) > > What did i do wrong? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Victor Mote" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 6:19 PM > Subject: RE: Development Version: xml+xsl -> fo -> > rtf > > > > Clay Leeds wrote: > > > > > "RTF > > > > > > This is currently not integrated with FOP but it > will soon. > > > This will create an rtf (rich text format) > document that will > > > attempt to contain as much information from the > fo document > > > as possible." > > > > > > If any of the fop-devs knows more about getting > FOP to output > > > to RTF, it would be great to update the web site > to make the > > > above actually contain useful information. I > checked CVS for > > > > RTF support is much more robust in the development > branch, thanks mostly > to > > the jfor crew, led by Bertrand Delecretaz, and > Peter Herweg's efforts to > > integrate it. However, since releases are not > being made from the > > development branch yet, users will have to > download and build it > themselves, > > at their own risk. > > > > > the FOP Output Target page (from whence the > above quote was > > > taken), but couldn't find any information on the > subject. The > > > RTF-related info appears to have either been > entered into the > > > FOP Output Targets page before it was brought > into CVS, or it > > > wasn't well-documented. > > > > The web site, of course, refers to the released > versions, and is accurate. > > > > WRT the source file, I don't follow. I can see the > content here: > > > http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/xml-fop/src/documentation/content/xdocs/ou > > tput.xml?rev=1.16&only_with_tag=MAIN&view=markup > > at line 240. > > > > Victor Mote > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
