Hi,I've developed a custom tag that create pdf from jsp by the
Fop.Tag's body may be directly FO or xml (xhtml) parsed by a xslt
stylesheet to obtain FO, and a pdfstream is sent to the browser.In
my opinion this tag could be more portable vs a servlet (see FopServlet
example, in
Joerg and Arved,
Thanks for sorting this out while I was asleep. I talk about these
things in terms of the parser, in spite of the offence it might give to
specification purists, because that is where I have spent a lot of my
time lately.
J.Pietschmann wrote:
Don't look at XML AttValue,
J.Pietschmann wrote:
Well, as far as I understand TTF and PFB files have a directory
and lots of pointers to other parts of the file. The metric
extractor loads the whole file into memory, for convenience.
This can be a significant memory load, and all the glyph
geometry definitions take up
J.Pietschmann wrote:
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Don't ask me for details (because I wasn't directly involved) but we had
to register new fonts with Linux so they got available in Batik for SVG.
So there seems to be some kind of font registry in Linux.
That's probably the X Windows font
Peter B. West wrote:
This is the critical point. The namespace not only restricts the
elements and attributes, but imposes itself on the contents of the
attribute values passed in by the XML parser.
Umm, the namespace does not impose anything. It's the XSLFO spec which
defines the
Victor Mote wrote:
If I followed this, then we would expect the current method to use a more
memory, but less processor time, while parsing the font file at runtime
would likely use less memory, but more processing.
I meant: If you are going to extract the font metrics from the
original font
J.Pietschmann is right in saying that the characters are coming from the
database - I am storing them there, pulling them out and inserting them into
my XML which is then being converted using FOP. E.g. I am storing #x00F0;
in the database, which I then hope will become the Icelandic eth
Victor Mote wrote:
Is it safe to assume that all *n*x
platforms have or could get an X environment?
No. This is a FAQ. It seems to be quite common for servers to come
without X libraries installed, search the FOP, Cocoon and Batik lists for
headless server. Also, there are providers out there
Balajee Chandrasekaran wrote:
I want to change the font width of my report. Basically I want to accomodate
more charaters perline of the report. So I beleive I have to reduce the font
width of the characters so as to squeeze in more characters.
I'm usinf FOP 0.20.4. I tried using
Al-Dhahir, Haitham wrote:
J.Pietschmann is right in saying that the characters are coming from the
database - I am storing them there, pulling them out and inserting them into
my XML which is then being converted using FOP. E.g. I am storing #x00F0;
in the database, which I then hope will
J.Pietschmann wrote:
Victor Mote wrote:
Is it safe to assume that all *n*x
platforms have or could get an X environment?
No. This is a FAQ.
Sorry. I have seen headless server postings go by, but it meant nothing to
me.
Well, FOP is already so tightly integrated with Batik that it wont
Hi All,
I have text node which has copyright (#169;)
and trademark (#x2122;) symbols embedded in it. When
I produce pdf using FOP 0.20.4, I get © for copyright
symbols on windows 2000 platform and Â#© on linux
redhat 7.2 platform. I am using jdk 1.3.1_03. Anybody
know why this is
Victor Mote wrote:
of this decision seems significant. If 99% of ISP/ASP users are using only
fonts that would be on their server, or if we don't mind telling them that
they should (or use an in-house server, or get the ISP to install
the fonts,
or ...), then maybe we come to a different
Victor Mote wrote:
My apologies for using up so much
bandwidth.
Victor,
That's what it's there for. No apology required.
Peter
--
Peter B. West [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/
Lord, to whom shall we go?
14 matches
Mail list logo
