On 09.05.2008 11:09:42 paul womack wrote: > I note that fop can generate printable PostScript > (the -ps flag in the command line version). > > My requirment is to generate EPSF; I am making > "fragments" for makeup into a large page > by an external (interactive) application. > > The postscript generated is most definitely > NOT epsf, or even close. In particular there *IS* > is a call to a global device operator - setpagedevice. > > q1) are there any plans to generate EPSF?
Not that I know of. > I suspect I know enough to use perl (or similar) to transform > the present PostScript into EPSF, but I'd rather not... May not be that easy. The PostScript renderer currently generates PostScript level 3. But most applications that deal with EPS can only process PostScript level 1. GhostScript should be able to transform PS Level 3 into EPS level 1. > An epsf file, to be useful in an interactive environment > needs a rendered preview. Given that fop can also > generate a number of raster formats, I was hoping > to use this facility to generate EPSF and a raster > preview from the same xsl/data. However, given > some helpful advice from Andreas, it appears > that choice of renderer influences layout decisions. > > q2) Is it possible to (somehow) use the same layout > for two renderers? in my particular circumstances > induividual character appearance is a moderately low > priority; whiat I do require is that line wrapping > and general layout is the same between the EPSF and > the preview. > > If the AT file specified the exact placement of each character > my purpose would be well served. The AT does that. Not with absolute coordinates for each glyph but the renderers will produce closely resembling output. > BugBear > Jeremias Maerki --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
