On Friday 26 July 2002 20:05, J.U. Anderegg wrote: . . . RTF is the format of yesterday: better generate MicroSoft Office XML or Open Office XML. Depends on what you're aiming for. RTF is a terrible format, yes, but at least it allows documents to be opened by a fair number of wordprocessors.
Hi Peter, I tentatively suggested using XSLT to generate RTF a little while ago, but I had no idea whether it was feasible. The main question would seem to be: is RTF a text-only format or a binary format? Can anyone answer that one for us? AFAIK, everything in RTF can be expressed with
Hello, On Friday 26 July 2002 10:20, Mulet, Jordi wrote: . . . We have started to experiment with jfor (FO-RTF) and we don't know the best path to follow and if there are plans to integrate jfor in FOP as a RTF renderer. . . . Note that the jfor license was recently changed to allow it to
On Sat, 2002-07-27 at 01:40, Kevin O'Neill wrote: Ok, so the millipoints conversion is specific to the xsl:fo to pdf conversion, the fo tree being in millipoints (correct me if I'm wrong). All lengths are in millipoints from the properties, fo tree to area tree. The renderers usually work in
On Mon, 2002-07-29 at 11:40, RamanaJV wrote: Ralph, Your idea of Fixing the awt renderer is the correct one. After a deep thought, I too came to the conclusion that instead of writing a PDF renderer, if we can tune up the AWT renderer, it will be great. The main problem with AWT
Bertrand, Thanks for clarifying that. The feasibility of an XSLT transform would be greatly influenced by the complexity of the mappings of properties into RTF structures. If the inheritance model of XSLFO had no ready parallel in RTF, that set of transformations would be a nightmare, I
Kutz Clemens (PEA-FE2/BA-T) wrote: hmmm. I indeed use the span-attribute in my appendix to list all TT-elements (TT=technical term). To test this I removed all span-attributes in my stylesheet, but the error still exist. any other idea? Well, it could be other undiscovered bug, try to