Re: help on error required?
thanks alot, yes same was the problem. THANKS. ASIM From: Jeremias Maerki [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: help on error required? Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2003 10:44:07 +0100 Looks like you have copied together the sources without paying attention to package names. You've even got the same file twice in different directories. Don't do that. Just extract the source distribution to a new directory and specify multiple source directories (assuming you want to compile within JBuilder). If you just want to use FOP (not develop in FOP) it's probably easier only to add fop.jar to your classpath and maybe copy the servlet sources to your project so you can customize them. On 08.03.2003 02:37:11 Asim Nazir wrote: hello, i am trying to use fop libaray for converting my fo document to pdf. i am using java and jbuilder7, i have added all the required libraries , but now these are the three error. CAN SOMEONE GUIDE ME ON THIS. here are the error msgs. FopServlet.java: Error #: 901 : package . stated in source D:\ASIM\fopapp\src\fop\contrib\servlet\src\FopServlet.java does not match directory fop.contrib.servlet.src FopPrintServlet.java: Error #: 901 : package . stated in source D:\ASIM\fopapp\src\fop\contrib\servlet\src\FopPrintServlet.java does not match directory fop.contrib.servlet.src StreamRenderer.java: Error #: 482 : duplicate definition of class org.apache.fop.apps.StreamRenderer$RenderQueueEntry, defined in D:\ASIM\fopapp\src\fop\src\org\apache\fop\apps\StreamRenderer.java and also defined in D:\ASIM\fopapp\src\org\apache\fop\apps\StreamRenderer.java Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AsIm NaZiR JaNjUa _ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: what is the difference b/w fop-0.20.5rc2-bin.tar.gz fop-0.20.5rc2-src.tar.gz
THANKS ALOT SIR it has vanished all confusion. thanks. ASIM From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: what is the difference b/w fop-0.20.5rc2-bin.tar.gz fop-0.20.5rc2-src.tar.gz Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2003 09:20:56 +0100 Hi fop-0.20.5rc2-bin.tar.gz is the binary distribution which means that is already compiled and no source code is included. fop-0.20.5rc2-src.tar.gz is what you are looking for. This is version 0.20.5 Release Candidate 2 of the FOP source code. Regards Chris Originalnachricht Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Re: what is the difference b/w fop-0.20.5rc2-bin.tar.gz fop-0.20.5rc2-src.tar.gz Datum: Sat, 08 Mar 2003 03:05:44 + hello, can someone guide me on what is the difference b/w fop-0.20.5rc2-bin.tar.gz fop-0.20.5rc2-src.tar.gz. as i want to use fop in my application, so which one i should add as library for compilation. HELP required plz. looking for help AsIm NaZiR JaNjUa _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail - 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] AsIm NaZiR JaNjUa _ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: fo:leader weird output (again) ;o)
In the same vein... I'm trying to put together a catalogue index, which is dependent on fo:leader. I'm also getting a ragged right-hand margin from 0.20.5rc2 (see to GET from http://coolbox.seseit.com/~rob/fop.0.20.5rc2.html), but when I used the last of yesterday's snapshot from the CVS repository (xml-fop_20030309052748.tar.gz) the output looks worse rather than better (sorry I've not got a link for this). I therefore wonder if I'm doing something stupid. My link has got my XML source and XSL... I was wondering if some kind soul could eye-ball the XSL to see if there is something I can do to improve matters, or if I should hang back and wait for fo:leader to be sorted out by the maestros? -Original Message- From: J.Pietschmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 04 March 2003 22:02 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: fo:leader weird output (again) ;o) Clay Leeds wrote: When you say this bug is fixed in CVS do you mean that it's fixed in the maintenance branch (i.e., the soon-to-be-released 0.20.5/0.20.5rc3 version) Yes. There is a CHANGES and an archive for the commit messages at http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-cvs J.Pietschmann - 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]
Re: setting the dpi in the TiffRenderer
Rob Stote wrote: Is there a way to set the dpi in you TiffRenderer. I know I can set the compression level, but I am not sure about the dpi. I believe it's FOP limitation currently - 72dpi only, so TIFFRenderer the same. -- Oleg Tkachenko Multiconn Technologies, Israel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: fo:leader weird output (again) ;o)
Rob Staveley (Tom) wrote: In the same vein... I'm trying to put together a catalogue index, which is dependent on fo:leader. I'm also getting a ragged right-hand margin from 0.20.5rc2 (see to GET from http://coolbox.seseit.com/~rob/fop.0.20.5rc2.html), but when I used the last of yesterday's snapshot from the CVS repository (xml-fop_20030309052748.tar.gz) the output looks worse rather than better (sorry I've not got a link for this). The problem is, the lines are correctly aligned during layout, in the PDF renderer the (912) strings have exactly the same x-position and area width. I can only guess something weird happens with the space calculation between the leader and the word on the line end. Also , the space at the block end is occasionally a problem. As a workaround: - Use leader-alignment=reference-area. This guarantees the leaders end at the same x-position if the followig word has the same length as on the line before. It also looks better. - Write your XSLT so that no extra space occurs at the end of the line, i.e. ...080)/fo:inline/fo:block instead of ...080)/fo:inline /fo:block This looks already much better. J.Pietschmann - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: fo:leader weird output (again) ;o)
J.Pietschmann wrote: something weird happens with the space calculation between the leader and the word on the line end. Ouch, stipid thinko: the area with the dots from the leader was assigned the leader length, rather than it's real word length. Also, some smace for the difference had to be inserted. This is corrected now. J.Pietschmann - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: fo:leader weird output (again) ;o)
Thank you so much! I followed your recommendations and http://coolbox.seseit.com/~rob/fop.0.20.5rc2.using-index.3.html looks good to me with 0.20.5rc2 -Original Message- From: J.Pietschmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 March 2003 11:29 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: fo:leader weird output (again) ;o) Rob Staveley (Tom) wrote: In the same vein... I'm trying to put together a catalogue index, which is dependent on fo:leader. I'm also getting a ragged right-hand margin from 0.20.5rc2 (see to GET from http://coolbox.seseit.com/~rob/fop.0.20.5rc2.html), but when I used the last of yesterday's snapshot from the CVS repository (xml-fop_20030309052748.tar.gz) the output looks worse rather than better (sorry I've not got a link for this). The problem is, the lines are correctly aligned during layout, in the PDF renderer the (912) strings have exactly the same x-position and area width. I can only guess something weird happens with the space calculation between the leader and the word on the line end. Also , the space at the block end is occasionally a problem. As a workaround: - Use leader-alignment=reference-area. This guarantees the leaders end at the same x-position if the followig word has the same length as on the line before. It also looks better. - Write your XSLT so that no extra space occurs at the end of the line, i.e. ...080)/fo:inline/fo:block instead of ...080)/fo:inline /fo:block This looks already much better. J.Pietschmann - 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]
Re: fo:leader weird output (again) ;o)
sorry but url doesn't work when i click submit button - Original Message - From: Rob Staveley (Tom) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2003 6:34 PM Subject: RE: fo:leader weird output (again) ;o) Thank you so much! I followed your recommendations and http://coolbox.seseit.com/~rob/fop.0.20.5rc2.using-index.3.html looks good to me with 0.20.5rc2 -Original Message- From: J.Pietschmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 March 2003 11:29 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: fo:leader weird output (again) ;o) Rob Staveley (Tom) wrote: In the same vein... I'm trying to put together a catalogue index, which is dependent on fo:leader. I'm also getting a ragged right-hand margin from 0.20.5rc2 (see to GET from http://coolbox.seseit.com/~rob/fop.0.20.5rc2.html), but when I used the last of yesterday's snapshot from the CVS repository (xml-fop_20030309052748.tar.gz) the output looks worse rather than better (sorry I've not got a link for this). The problem is, the lines are correctly aligned during layout, in the PDF renderer the (912) strings have exactly the same x-position and area width. I can only guess something weird happens with the space calculation between the leader and the word on the line end. Also , the space at the block end is occasionally a problem. As a workaround: - Use leader-alignment=reference-area. This guarantees the leaders end at the same x-position if the followig word has the same length as on the line before. It also looks better. - Write your XSLT so that no extra space occurs at the end of the line, i.e. ...080)/fo:inline/fo:block instead of ...080)/fo:inline /fo:block This looks already much better. J.Pietschmann - 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]
