Re: rocky transition from XEP to Apache FOP

2009-03-09 Thread Andreas Delmelle 

On 09 Mar 2009, at 19:30, Hamacher, Eric wrote:

Hi


Java 1.5.0_16
FOP 0.94
XEP Version 4.14 build 20081212

Just looking for some ideas.

We’re trying to leave XEP for Apache FOP but it’s been a rough ride  
for our FO documents.  These documents run fine when generating PDFs  
in XEP but results in damaged PDFs with many severe errors.   
Unfortunately,  I can’t share a FO document with you.   The root  
element of a typical FO looks like


fo:root xmlns:fo=http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Format;
 xmlns:xs=http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema;
 xmlns:xdt=http://www.w3.org/2004/10/xpath-datatypes;
 xmlns:fn=http://www.w3.org/2004/10/xpath-functions;
 font-family=Arial
 font-size=8pt

Could there be a problem with the version of FO being used?


Not really with the 'version'. You could try FOP 0.95, maybe, but I  
don't think that's going to be much different.


There are a number of elements/constructs that FOP currently does not  
implement and XEP does (like fo:inline-container and fo:bidi-override).
In other areas, FOP is more strictly compliant to the XSL-FO Rec (or  
at least interprets it differently than XEP; thinking of indent- 
inheritance and space-resolution).
Those factors could require a significant amount of changes to the  
stylesheet that is producing the FO, in order to obtain the same  
result as XEP.



Regards

Andreas
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscr...@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-h...@xmlgraphics.apache.org

Re: rocky transition from XEP to Apache FOP

2009-03-09 Thread Chris Bowditch 

Hamacher, Eric wrote:

Hi,


Java 1.5.0_16

FOP 0.94

XEP Version 4.14 build 20081212

 


Just looking for some ideas.

 

We’re trying to leave XEP for Apache FOP but it’s been a rough ride for 
our FO documents.  These documents run fine when generating PDFs in XEP 
but results in damaged PDFs with many severe errors.  Unfortunately,  I 
can’t share a FO document with you.   The root element of a typical FO 
looks like


I've had to tackle the same problem a few times. The biggest difference 
between XEP and FOP is the way indent inheritance works. You can make 
FOP behave like XEP by adding the following option to your fop.xconf:


break-indent-inheritancetrue/break-indent-inheritance

Although this means FOP is no longer 100% compliant with the spec this 
behaviour is far more intuitive and compatible with XEP.


There are also several other problems that can crop up. Mainly warnings 
about overflow, table-layout=auto not being supported etc.


If you have a specific error you need help with then post the error 
message up here and we'll do our best to assist.


Chris



 


fo:root xmlns:fo=http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Format;

 xmlns:xs=http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema;

 xmlns:xdt=http://www.w3.org/2004/10/xpath-datatypes;

 xmlns:fn=http://www.w3.org/2004/10/xpath-functions;

 font-family=Arial

 font-size=8pt

 


Could there be a problem with the version of FO being used?

 


Thanks

 


*J.  ERIC  HAMACHER*

Software Application Developer

608.664.3859

8476 Greenway Boulevard

Suite 100

Middleton, WI  53562

USA

GALLUP Technology

 


Achiever | Learner | Restorative | Intellection | Deliberative

 




IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments, if any, may 
contain confidential and privileged material and are intended only for 
the person or entity to which the message is addressed. If you are not 
an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, 
dissemination, distribution, disclosure, or copying of this information 
is unauthorized and strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
communication in error, please contact the sender immediately by reply 
e-mail, and destroy all copies of the original message.





-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscr...@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-h...@xmlgraphics.apache.org