That's a good question. That is how it is named in the FOP trunk, and has been for a long time apparently. I agree that fop.bat would be preferable for Win platforms. I'll suggest this be changed in trunk, in which case I can merge into my dev repo.
I never use fop.cmd myself for my development work. Furthermore, I only run FOP on MacOSX, where I use ant to invoke it directly from the java task. Thanks for testing out the Bidi and Middle Eastern support. I have recently added fixes for fo:leader and a few other issues related to Bidi contexts. See Patch 6 milestone under [1]. [1] https://skynav.trac.cvsdude.com/fop/report/6 Also, FYI, I recently moved the Skynav FOP repository to a (slightly) different URL on GITHUB [2]. [2] http://github.com/skynav/fop Best, Glenn On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Jonathan Levinson < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Glenn,**** > > ** ** > > I have a question for you about skynav FOP. Why on Windows do you use > “.cmd” as the extension of the fop command file – fop.cmd, rather than > fop.bat?**** > > ** ** > > We are going to be deploying skynav FOP at many sites and it would be > great if we could rename the “.cmd” file to a “.bat” file since it would > require fewer changes to our interface code.**** > > ** ** > > Doing some research it seems that on Windows 7, Vista, and XP there is > little difference between “.cmd” and “.bat” files, and differences only > become significant on Windows 98. Am I wrong? Did I misread an article on > the Web?**** > > ** ** > > Thanks for the excellent work you have done! Our Middle Eastern team > tested your code and found nothing wrong with it in the context of our > reporting tool, which calls FOP to do rendering.**** > > ** ** > > Best Regards,**** > > Jonathan Levinson**** > > Senior Software Developer**** > > Object Group**** > > InterSystems**** > > +1 617-621-0600**** > > [email protected]**** > > ** ** >
