Re: Wiki Migration and other issues
Christian Geisert wrote: J.Pietschmann wrote: [..] Should we wait for the Apache XML reorganization to complete or should we rush ahead and create out own Wiki already? +1 for the new wiki It has a nicer look, supports XML export and we can have 'commit messages' to fop-cvs Others opinions? Considering this a strong recommendation from infrastructure I'd say we migrate to the new wiki (of course if there are no -1s) There's a tool for automatic converting content from the old wiki and if this doesn't work I'll volunteer to do it manually. Christian
Re: Wiki Migration and other issues
On Mar 4, 2004, at 9:01 AM, Christian Geisert wrote: Christian Geisert wrote: J.Pietschmann wrote: [..] Should we wait for the Apache XML reorganization to complete or should we rush ahead and create out own Wiki already? +1 for the new wiki It has a nicer look, supports XML export and we can have 'commit messages' to fop-cvs Others opinions? Considering this a strong recommendation from infrastructure I'd say we migrate to the new wiki (of course if there are no -1s) There's a tool for automatic converting content from the old wiki and if this doesn't work I'll volunteer to do it manually. Christian Sounds good to me... Looks 'snappier'! (sorry! ;-) and the added capabilities[1] look promising. There're a couple of other Wiki's I'm involved with I'd like to have upgraded to MoinMoinWiki as well. Anyway, this looks like a nice move to me, especially since it looks like the Apache General Wiki[2] has moved to MoinMoinWiki as well... [1] http://moinmoin.wikiwikiweb.de/MoinMoinFeatures [2] http://wiki.apache.org/general
Re: Wiki Migration and other issues
On Mar 4, 2004, at 9:20 AM, Clay Leeds wrote: [2] http://wiki.apache.org/general BTW, I might add, that we're not the first... It seems[1] that Xindice[2] also has a MoinMoinWiki... [1] http://wiki.apache.org/xindice [2] http://xml.apache.org/xindice
RE: Wiki Migration and other issues
-Original Message- From: Clay Leeds [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] snip / Sounds good to me... Looks 'snappier'! (sorry! ;-) and the added capabilities[1] look promising. There're a couple of other Wiki's I'm I also had a look, and apparently, the bottom-part (below 5. Contact...) of the page is displayed localized (in Dutch from here) while all the rest of the page displays in English. Apart from this minor detail, it indeed looks much cooler than the previous, so my blessing for this. Cheers, Andreas
Re: Wiki Migration and other issues
Christian Geisert wrote: Christian Geisert wrote: J.Pietschmann wrote: [..] Should we wait for the Apache XML reorganization to complete or should we rush ahead and create out own Wiki already? +1 for the new wiki It has a nicer look, supports XML export and we can have 'commit messages' to fop-cvs Others opinions? Considering this a strong recommendation from infrastructure I'd say we migrate to the new wiki (of course if there are no -1s) There's a tool for automatic converting content from the old wiki and if this doesn't work I'll volunteer to do it manually. Ok by me. From what I've seen on infrastructure@, there may be some post-conversion tidying to do. +1 Peter -- Peter B. West http://www.powerup.com.au/~pbwest/resume.html
Wiki Migration and other issues
Hi all, now that the ASF has its new Wiki farm up and running, they pester everyone with moving from UseModWiki http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?HomePage to the MoinMoinWiki: http://wiki.apache.org/general Should we wait for the Apache XML reorganization to complete or should we rush ahead and create out own Wiki already? The other issue: The hyphenation files with problematic licenses are apparently still in the HEAD CVS ready for checkout. I can't remember any status change here. What should we doe with them? J.Pietschmann
Re: Wiki Migration and other issues
Hehe, you thought the same thing at the same time. See my other post. I really need to sleep over that one. Concerning the Wiki: I see no immediate need right now unless there are plans to shut down the old Wiki. But +0. On 27.02.2004 20:58:29 J.Pietschmann wrote: Hi all, now that the ASF has its new Wiki farm up and running, they pester everyone with moving from UseModWiki http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?HomePage to the MoinMoinWiki: http://wiki.apache.org/general Should we wait for the Apache XML reorganization to complete or should we rush ahead and create out own Wiki already? The other issue: The hyphenation files with problematic licenses are apparently still in the HEAD CVS ready for checkout. I can't remember any status change here. What should we doe with them? Jeremias Maerki
Re: Migration
There aren't any fully integrated tools out there ( or I have missed them ). I use XML Spy ( which is cool ), to do the XML bit, Antenna House XSL Formatter to display the result of applying XSL to XML to produce FO, and to edit and debug XSL int the IBM XSL Editor ( which is a really good tool ). Anyone else have any better tools. Chris Hamilton-Emery [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 11/07/2001 14:30:24 Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject: Migration Hi I'm new here and apologies for any inanities. We're busy introducing an XML workflow at Cambridge, and I want to begin considering the transfer of traditional composition specifications to FO specs. But where do I start. I have a DTD and the formatting of any XML will in part depend on a complex relationship of elements and attributes and an FO spec dependent on these variances. Nothing surprising here I guess, but is there an XSL stylesheet tool I can use to design things? Does anybody out there offer consultancy services of this kind? And lastly, all of this presupposes that I can use FO to achieve very high-quality setting of academic books and journals, but is this the right direction? That's my first set of queries! Best Chris __ Christopher Hamilton-Emery Press Production Director Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building Cambridge CB2 2RU, UK tel: +44 (0)1223 325840 (direct and voicemail) fax: +44 (0)1223 325700 web: http://www.cambridge.org web: http://printing.cambridge.org (printing services) web: http://uk.cambridge.org (outside North America) web: http://us.cambridge.org (North America) web: http://www.journals.cup.org (Journals) __ - Original Message - From: Michiel Verhoef [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 2:09 PM Subject: RE: XHTML to PDF using FOP Hi, First, there is a weird d element in your last table. I'm no XHTML expert but it is not HTML AFAIK. Second, some of the tr are missing td elements. A tr needs a td (at least, in HTML it does) so my guess is that your XHTML is not valid HTML. Any xsl that converts valid HTML to say, fo will give errors or at least not the desired result.. HTH, Michiel $ -Original Message- $ From: rajeev nair [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] $ Sent: woensdag 11 juli 2001 14:15 $ To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] $ Subject: XHTML to PDF using FOP $ $ $ HELLO, $ can anybody help me to convert my XHTMLinto pdf. $ the XHTML I'M GIVING BELOW.if I avoid all the anchor $ tags(a)tags and table tags and make it pure xsl data $ file then i'm easily able to write xslfo file for this $ and it is making good pdf. $ But for the given Xhtml file how i write xslfo.My real $ confusion is where there is table,tr,td tags and also $ anchor tags. $ Can anyone help me. $ $ ?xml version=1.0? $ html $ head $ link rel=stylesheet href=test2.css $ type=text/x-oeb1-css/ $ /head $ body $ a name=toc $ toc $ table $ tr $ td align=left $ h2 $ $ bContent/b $ /h2 $ /td $ /tr $ tr $ a $ href=#chapTitle Image/a $ /tr $ tr $ a $ href=#chap0Page1/a $ /tr $ $ tr $ a $ href=#chap1Page2/a $ /tr $ $ tr $ a $ href=#chap2Page3/a $ /tr $ $ tr $ a $ href=#chap3Page4/a $ /tr $ $ tr $ a $ href=#chap4Page5/a $ /tr $ $ tr $ a $ href=#chap5Page6/a $ /tr $ $ /table $ /toc $ /a $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ a name=chap $ chap $ table border=25 $ img src=part1.gif/ $ /table $ /chap $ /a $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ br/ $ a name=chap0 $ chap0 $ book3.Click the $ sheet-tab Score to bring $ the worksheet Score to front. Now let us select the $ range B4:E7 (figure 10.26 shows the data to be $ copied). Click the cell B4, press the Shift key (and $ hold it down), click the cell E7, release the Shift $ key. Now the range B4:E7 is successfully $ selected./book $ book4. Choose Edit $ Copy (or click the Copy $ tool) and the data in the range gets copied to the $ clipboard. Also a running, dotted rectangle (also $ called marching ants, marquis, or moving boundary) $ appears around the selected range. These marching ants $ indicate that Paste tool (and command Paste in the $ Edit-menu) is enabled. Paste tool remains enabled as $ long as marching ants are present. In order to remove $ these marching ants simply strike the Esc key. /book $ book5. We want to $ paste this data in the Sheet2 $ of Sales Data.xls therefore, choose Window Sales Data $ (or click the Sales Data icon on the taskbar) in order $ to make the workbook Sales Data to be current one. $ Then click the sheet-tab Sheet2 to bring the worksheet $ Sheet2 to the front. /book $ book6. Click the cell $ B4 and choose Edit Paste $ (or click the Paste tool). Alternatively, click the $ cell B4 and simply strike the Enter key. Also, strike
Re: Migration
Chris Hamilton-Emery writes: services of this kind? And lastly, all of this presupposes that I can use FO to achieve very high-quality setting of academic books and journals, but is this the right direction? My gut feeling is that you would be unwise to depend too much on FO at this point in the game. Yes, XSL FO works, in various implementations, and you can do pretty-reasonable typesetting, but - the spec is still not fully finished - it does not aim to cover everything in this version - the implementations are very much in development so of course you could and should set up some trial projects, but don't assume you can switch to it at the end of the year :-} I have just finished a typical simple book in FO, an academic conference proceedings. The design is not complex at all, and the result is indistinguishable from what I would have done last year in LaTeX. But thats the rub - its like LaTeX, not Quark. So you have the same power, the same problems, and the same support burden. With the downside that the typesetting is taken to one remove, so that your style cannot talk to the typesetting engine. It's that very high-quality setting phrase that worries me. I know what sort of standards you have in Cambridge, and I would not want to bet money that FO is really up to the job. Sebastian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
