Re: Output from NIST test suite
Hi,
in your GhostScript installation there should also exist a gswin32c.exe
which runs in console mode and therefore doesn't open a GUI window every
time.
Bye,
Bernd
On Saturday 03 January 2004 00:35, Finn Bock wrote:
[Jeremias Maerki]
I drive ghostscript with a bash script like this:
for f in $*; do
r=${f/.pdf/.png}
echo $f $r
gswin32 -q -dSAFER -dBATCH -dNOPAUSE -sDEVICE=png16m \
-sOutputFile=$r $f
done
and it is quite slow and cause the ghostscript console to flicker and
grab the focus all the time. Annoying.
Does anyone here know of a better (and maybe faster) way of using
ghostscript to convert 615 pdf files to images?
Re: Trying to use the NIST test suite.
On Wednesday 24 December 2003 15:39, Andreas L. Delmelle wrote: -Original Message- From: Finn Bock [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi, I was looking for xsl-fo test suites on the net and found http://www.w3.org/Style/XSL/TestSuite/ but for some reason all the test in the NIST zip file uses master-name instead of master-reference on the fo:page-sequence's. fo:page-sequence master-name=test-page-master Hi, Apparently this was admitted by earlier versions of the spec. Older versions of FOP still supported this, but the latest version throws an error... Hi, wouldn't it be reasonable to also accept the obsolete 'master-name' and to just print out a corresponding warning message instead of throwing an error? AFAIK, the attribute has only been renamed to 'master-reference', but its meaning and usage remained identically the same. Regards, Bernd
Re: FOP logo
On Monday 13 January 2003 11:01, Oleg Tkachenko wrote: Bernd Brandstetter wrote: feeling inspired by your's and Oleg's suggestions and also a little bit bored this Sunday afternoon, I thought I'll take the chance and improve my Gimping skills. Here's the result :-) Not bad. Something like this I meant. But (sorry for being critical, it's art, not coding :): why it's sitting back to us. No problem :-) This was in no way meant to be a serious proposal for the logo. I've also created one with a parrot sitting with it's front to us. However, I found this one with it's impish look back over the shoulder much nicer. F and P are too simple. Maybe. But IMHO the letters FOP should be easily readable and the whole logo shouldn't be too overloaded with additional stuff. And I'm not sure about scalability - e.g. how it'll look 3cmX2cm? A vector graphic (preferrably SVG) would of course be better. However, I couldn't find a good-looking vectorized parrot clipart. Regards, Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix
On Monday 13 January 2003 11:05, Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 12.01.2003 11:40:57 Bernd Brandstetter wrote: After having tried to understand how fop works by just reading the code for a couple of hours now, FOrtress inevitably comes to my mind ;-) (in the sense of: Not easy to get in, at least for a newbie) :-) Unfortunately, Fortress is already taken by the Apache Avalon project for one their new containers. I bet they wouldn't be happy to hear your association with the name. Let's be serious again: What do you think could be improved to make FOP easier to get in? Design documentation :-) When I clicked on the Architecture and Design links, I had expected a bit more than 20 to 30 lines of text. But I must admit that I have totally overlooked the Understanding the design section which is a bit more verbose. Still, it would be nice to have something in the style of the Alt design description - which I think is really great - for the standard design too. Regards, Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PATCH] doc validation fix
On Saturday 11 January 2003 20:13, Victor Mote wrote: Jeremias Maerki wrote: - Do we like our current logo? :-) I hope I am not out of line to ask an even more fundamental question -- do we like our current name? I never have a problem writing it, but when speaking it, I cannot make my mouth say fop, but invariably say eff-oh-pee instead. Our root FO is a FOrtunate or perhaps FOrtuitous one, as there are many English words that start with these letters, and probably many more that contain them. FOr(r)est might have been good (since we seem to work with trees a lot), but is taken. FOrward, FOcus, or even FOreword might each work, or efFOrtless (). How about FOliage (with a leaf logo)? Or perhaps a Latin word to reflect our international crew -- FOcus (again), or FOrtis, or FOrum. I also like Oleg's idea of throwing it out to the user community. After having tried to understand how fop works by just reading the code for a couple of hours now, FOrtress inevitably comes to my mind ;-) (in the sense of: Not easy to get in, at least for a newbie) Bye, Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FOP logo
On Sunday 12 January 2003 01:35, Peter B. West wrote: Clare's designs (see previous post) were based on a quill inking in the P in a large FOP on a page which also contained Chancery-stle text in a smaller font. The quill was originally supposed to be a connection with the Apache feather, but apparently that particular feather didn't work, and the Apache colours were too garish. Hi, feeling inspired by your's and Oleg's suggestions and also a little bit bored this Sunday afternoon, I thought I'll take the chance and improve my Gimping skills. Here's the result :-) Best regards, Bernd attachment: fop-parrot-logo.png- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
