Re: Why integrating DITA into XMLGraphics makes sense.

2014-05-27 Thread Chris Bowditch

Hi Ron,

I agree that some education of both parties is needed. Its no longer 
true that FOP is a buggy limited piece of software. That might have been 
true 3-4 years ago, but it is becoming a very mature product now. That 
is a clear sign that the DITA experts are out of date. We need to work 
with the DITA experts to keep them informed of progress. Also input from 
the DITA experts on the top 10 missing features or bugs would be helpful 
for us in prioritizing work too.


Of course, DITA folks might see a solution in XEP or Antenna house, but 
both are expensive, and the last time I checked AH only supports PDF 
output, not PS or AFP.


Thanks,

Chris

On 25/05/2014 15:40, Ron Wheeler wrote:

A good starting point:
http://thecontentwrangler.com/2008/04/11/choosing_an_xml_schema_docbook_or_dita/

A good discussion about how DITA-OT uses XSL and XSL-FO to create PDF 
from DITA XML.

http://www.scriptorium.com/whitepapers/ditaotpdf/DITA-PDF-tweaks.pdf

I am trying to get the FOP side to be aware of the importance of DITA 
as a standard for documentation so the FOP developers will pay some 
attention to the needs for improved FOP features and perhaps give 
advice to the DITA-OT developers to use FOP in the best possible way.


I am trying to get the DITA side to stop considering FOP to be a 
static thing that can not be changed and to start to contribute ideas 
and funding to make FOP do the things that it needs to do. I also want 
to encourage the DITA-OT team to enter into discussions with the FOP 
experts to make sure that DITA-OT uses FOP in the best possible way.


This problem with the leading dots is a good example of the problem.
When the problem was raised by a documentation author, one of the 
leading DITA experts proposed the solution to the problem was to stop 
trying to make FOP work since it is buggy and inconsistent rather than 
suggesting that the user ask the question in the FOP user forum.
When I brought the problem here, an answer was provided that looks 
like a simple change to DITA-OT's FOP configuration that seemed to be 
a solution to this problem that is well understood here.


Ron

On 24/05/2014 9:22 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
I'm not familiar with DITA, but if a DITA product depends on FOP, 
then DITA as a group or its sponsors should consider funding the work 
they would like to see done in FOP. Simply asking the few developers 
in the FOP project to support DITA priorities won't guarantee any 
results.



On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 5:38 AM, Ron Wheeler 
rwhee...@artifact-software.com 
mailto:rwhee...@artifact-software.com wrote:


You are right , of course.
However, this very large community ( one DITA LinkedIn group has
4,600 members, the Technical Doc group has over 14,000 members) 
does not see themselves as users of FOP but only as users of

DITA-OT which in turn has a dependency on FOP.

As far as I know DITA is the most popular XML language for
constructing documents and it seems odd that there is almost no
connection between the Apache efforts in XML and the biggest
potential set of users and drivers of demand for the things that
XMLGraphics is producing.

I will pass on the information to the forum where the question
was raised.

Thanks



On 23/05/2014 6:05 PM, Luis Bernardo wrote:


I think this only shows that the person is not going to the
source (i.e., the FOP user mailing list) to request help.

The example shown can be greatly improved by using

fo:leader width=100% leader-pattern=use-content./fo:leader

instead of

fo:leader leader-pattern=dots /

The FOP implementation repeats 3 dots (...) when using the
leader-pattern=dots which is not very intelligent since it can
lead to misalignment many times. But by specifying the leader
content as just one dot the result can be greatly improved,
although I agree that there is room for improvement in this feature.


On 5/23/14, 4:14 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote:

The conversation below shows one of the reasons why I would like to see 
DITA become part of the XMLGraphics family.
One of the most experienced and influential DITA practitioners is giving 
advice about the suitability of FOP for producing correct PDFs.

Ron
-


This is an issue with the FOP XSL-FO engine (one of many).

For top-qualify PDF output you really need to license Antenna House XSL
Formatter or RenderX XEP, both of which produce excellent results. FOP
simply has too many bugs and limitations to be generally useful for
production PDF generation using XSL-FO, unfortunately.

Cheers,


XXX



On 5/23/14, 9:54 AM, yyy [dita-users]
dita-us...@yahoogroups.com  mailto:dita-us...@yahoogroups.com  wrote:

  
[Attachment(s) #TopText from Mark Peters included below]

  
  Hi,



Using DITA-OT 1.7 and the default org.dita.pdf2 plugin, I 

Re: Why integrating DITA into XMLGraphics makes sense.

2014-05-25 Thread Ron Wheeler

A good starting point:
http://thecontentwrangler.com/2008/04/11/choosing_an_xml_schema_docbook_or_dita/

A good discussion about how DITA-OT uses XSL and XSL-FO to create PDF 
from DITA XML.

http://www.scriptorium.com/whitepapers/ditaotpdf/DITA-PDF-tweaks.pdf

I am trying to get the FOP side to be aware of the importance of DITA as 
a standard for documentation so the FOP developers will pay some 
attention to the needs for improved FOP features and perhaps give advice 
to the DITA-OT developers to use FOP in the best possible way.


I am trying to get the DITA side to stop considering FOP to be a static 
thing that can not be changed and to start to contribute ideas and 
funding to make FOP do the things that it needs to do. I also want to 
encourage the DITA-OT team to enter into discussions with the FOP 
experts to make sure that DITA-OT uses FOP in the best possible way.


This problem with the leading dots is a good example of the problem.
When the problem was raised by a documentation author, one of the 
leading DITA experts proposed the solution to the problem was to stop 
trying to make FOP work since it is buggy and inconsistent rather than 
suggesting that the user ask the question in the FOP user forum.
When I brought the problem here, an answer was provided that looks like 
a simple change to DITA-OT's FOP configuration that seemed to be a 
solution to this problem that is well understood here.


Ron

On 24/05/2014 9:22 PM, Glenn Adams wrote:
I'm not familiar with DITA, but if a DITA product depends on FOP, then 
DITA as a group or its sponsors should consider funding the work they 
would like to see done in FOP. Simply asking the few developers in the 
FOP project to support DITA priorities won't guarantee any results.



On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 5:38 AM, Ron Wheeler 
rwhee...@artifact-software.com 
mailto:rwhee...@artifact-software.com wrote:


You are right , of course.
However, this very large community ( one DITA LinkedIn group has
4,600 members, the Technical Doc group has over 14,000 members) 
does not see themselves as users of FOP but only as users of

DITA-OT which in turn has a dependency on FOP.

As far as I know DITA is the most popular XML language for
constructing documents and it seems odd that there is almost no
connection between the Apache efforts in XML and the biggest
potential set of users and drivers of demand for the things that
XMLGraphics is producing.

I will pass on the information to the forum where the question was
raised.

Thanks



On 23/05/2014 6:05 PM, Luis Bernardo wrote:


I think this only shows that the person is not going to the
source (i.e., the FOP user mailing list) to request help.

The example shown can be greatly improved by using

fo:leader width=100% leader-pattern=use-content./fo:leader

instead of

fo:leader leader-pattern=dots /

The FOP implementation repeats 3 dots (...) when using the
leader-pattern=dots which is not very intelligent since it can
lead to misalignment many times. But by specifying the leader
content as just one dot the result can be greatly improved,
although I agree that there is room for improvement in this feature.


On 5/23/14, 4:14 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote:

The conversation below shows one of the reasons why I would like to see 
DITA become part of the XMLGraphics family.
One of the most experienced and influential DITA practitioners is giving 
advice about the suitability of FOP for producing correct PDFs.

Ron
-


This is an issue with the FOP XSL-FO engine (one of many).

For top-qualify PDF output you really need to license Antenna House XSL
Formatter or RenderX XEP, both of which produce excellent results. FOP
simply has too many bugs and limitations to be generally useful for
production PDF generation using XSL-FO, unfortunately.

Cheers,


XXX



On 5/23/14, 9:54 AM, yyy [dita-users]
dita-us...@yahoogroups.com  mailto:dita-us...@yahoogroups.com  wrote:

  
[Attachment(s) #TopText from Mark Peters included below]

  
  Hi,



Using DITA-OT 1.7 and the default org.dita.pdf2 plugin, I notice that
some TOC entries are randomly misaligned slightly. The leader extends one
or two extra dots.


For example (not sure if the formatting will come through correctly. An
image is also attached):

Chapter 1: RTI4T System Overview...11
RTI System Diagram.12
System Components...12
RTI Network Diagram...15
Summary of RTI Setup Tasks...15


Like I said, the misalignment is random. It's not all H1s or H2s, for
example, which would probably be relatively easy to fix.


Even more puzzling, the XSL-FO attributes in the temp 

Re: Why integrating DITA into XMLGraphics makes sense.

2014-05-24 Thread Ron Wheeler

You are right , of course.
However, this very large community ( one DITA LinkedIn group has 4,600 
members, the Technical Doc group has over 14,000 members) does not see 
themselves as users of FOP but only as users of DITA-OT which in turn 
has a dependency on FOP.


As far as I know DITA is the most popular XML language for constructing 
documents and it seems odd that there is almost no connection between 
the Apache efforts in XML and the biggest potential set of users and 
drivers of demand for the things that XMLGraphics is producing.


I will pass on the information to the forum where the question was raised.

Thanks


On 23/05/2014 6:05 PM, Luis Bernardo wrote:


I think this only shows that the person is not going to the source 
(i.e., the FOP user mailing list) to request help.


The example shown can be greatly improved by using

fo:leader width=100% leader-pattern=use-content./fo:leader

instead of

fo:leader leader-pattern=dots /

The FOP implementation repeats 3 dots (...) when using the 
leader-pattern=dots which is not very intelligent since it can lead 
to misalignment many times. But by specifying the leader content as 
just one dot the result can be greatly improved, although I agree that 
there is room for improvement in this feature.



On 5/23/14, 4:14 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote:

The conversation below shows one of the reasons why I would like to see DITA 
become part of the XMLGraphics family.
One of the most experienced and influential DITA practitioners is giving advice 
about the suitability of FOP for producing correct PDFs.

Ron
-


This is an issue with the FOP XSL-FO engine (one of many).

For top-qualify PDF output you really need to license Antenna House XSL
Formatter or RenderX XEP, both of which produce excellent results. FOP
simply has too many bugs and limitations to be generally useful for
production PDF generation using XSL-FO, unfortunately.

Cheers,


XXX



On 5/23/14, 9:54 AM, yyy [dita-users]
dita-us...@yahoogroups.com  wrote:

  
[Attachment(s) #TopText from Mark Peters included below]

  
  Hi,



Using DITA-OT 1.7 and the default org.dita.pdf2 plugin, I notice that
some TOC entries are randomly misaligned slightly. The leader extends one
or two extra dots.


For example (not sure if the formatting will come through correctly. An
image is also attached):

Chapter 1: RTI4T System Overview...11
RTI System Diagram.12
System Components...12
RTI Network Diagram...15
Summary of RTI Setup Tasks...15


Like I said, the misalignment is random. It's not all H1s or H2s, for
example, which would probably be relatively easy to fix.


Even more puzzling, the XSL-FO attributes in the temp files are identical
for nodes at the same level that have different alignments.

For example, here are two H1-level nodes. The first node is slightly
misaligned. But the indent values are identical for both nodes.

fo:block start-indent=25pt + (1 * 30pt) + 14pt
fo:block end-indent=22pt font-size=10pt
font-weight=normal last-line-end-indent=-22pt text-align=justify
text-align-last=justify text-indent=-14pt
fo:basic-link
internal-destination=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1310
line-height=150%
fo:inline end-indent=14ptRTI System
Diagram/fo:inline
fo:inline keep-together.within-line=always
start-indent=-14pt
fo:leader leader-pattern=dots/
fo:page-number-citation
ref-id=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1310/
/fo:inline
/fo:basic-link
/fo:block
/fo:block
fo:block start-indent=25pt + (1 * 30pt) + 14pt
fo:block end-indent=22pt font-size=10pt
font-weight=normal last-line-end-indent=-22pt text-align=justify
text-align-last=justify text-indent=-14pt
fo:basic-link
internal-destination=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1334
line-height=150%
fo:inline end-indent=14pt System
Components /fo:inline
fo:inline keep-together.within-line=always
start-indent=-14pt
fo:leader leader-pattern=dots/
fo:page-number-citation
ref-id=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1334/
/fo:inline
/fo:basic-link
/fo:block
/fo:block


I'm viewing the PDFs in Abobe Reader, but that hasn't made a difference
in the past.


Any idea what's going on?


Thanks for any insights.

yyy


--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email:rwhee...@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102





--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact 

Re: Why integrating DITA into XMLGraphics makes sense.

2014-05-24 Thread Glenn Adams
I'm not familiar with DITA, but if a DITA product depends on FOP, then DITA
as a group or its sponsors should consider funding the work they would like
to see done in FOP. Simply asking the few developers in the FOP project to
support DITA priorities won't guarantee any results.


On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 5:38 AM, Ron Wheeler rwhee...@artifact-software.com
 wrote:

  You are right , of course.
 However, this very large community ( one DITA LinkedIn group has 4,600
 members, the Technical Doc group has over 14,000 members)  does not see
 themselves as users of FOP but only as users of DITA-OT which in turn has a
 dependency on FOP.

 As far as I know DITA is the most popular XML language for constructing
 documents and it seems odd that there is almost no connection between the
 Apache efforts in XML and the biggest potential set of users and drivers of
 demand for the things that XMLGraphics is producing.

 I will pass on the information to the forum where the question was raised.

 Thanks



 On 23/05/2014 6:05 PM, Luis Bernardo wrote:


 I think this only shows that the person is not going to the source (i.e.,
 the FOP user mailing list) to request help.

 The example shown can be greatly improved by using

 fo:leader width=100% leader-pattern=use-content./fo:leader

 instead of

 fo:leader leader-pattern=dots /

 The FOP implementation repeats 3 dots (...) when using the
 leader-pattern=dots which is not very intelligent since it can lead to
 misalignment many times. But by specifying the leader content as just one
 dot the result can be greatly improved, although I agree that there is room
 for improvement in this feature.


 On 5/23/14, 4:14 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote:

  The conversation below shows one of the reasons why I would like to see DITA 
 become part of the XMLGraphics family.
 One of the most experienced and influential DITA practitioners is giving 
 advice about the suitability of FOP for producing correct PDFs.

 Ron
 -


 This is an issue with the FOP XSL-FO engine (one of many).

 For top-qualify PDF output you really need to license Antenna House XSL
 Formatter or RenderX XEP, both of which produce excellent results. FOP
 simply has too many bugs and limitations to be generally useful for
 production PDF generation using XSL-FO, unfortunately.

 Cheers,


 XXX



 On 5/23/14, 9:54 AM, yyy [dita-users]dita-us...@yahoogroups.com 
 dita-us...@yahoogroups.com wrote:



[Attachment(s) #TopText from Mark Peters included below]


  Hi,


 Using DITA-OT 1.7 and the default org.dita.pdf2 plugin, I notice that
 some TOC entries are randomly misaligned slightly. The leader extends one
 or two extra dots.


 For example (not sure if the formatting will come through correctly. An
 image is also attached):

 Chapter 1: RTI4T System Overview...11
 RTI System Diagram.12
 System Components...12
 RTI Network Diagram...15
 Summary of RTI Setup Tasks...15


 Like I said, the misalignment is random. It's not all H1s or H2s, for
 example, which would probably be relatively easy to fix.


 Even more puzzling, the XSL-FO attributes in the temp files are identical
 for nodes at the same level that have different alignments.

 For example, here are two H1-level nodes. The first node is slightly
 misaligned. But the indent values are identical for both nodes.

 fo:block start-indent=25pt + (1 * 30pt) + 14pt
fo:block end-indent=22pt font-size=10pt
 font-weight=normal last-line-end-indent=-22pt text-align=justify
 text-align-last=justify text-indent=-14pt
fo:basic-link
 internal-destination=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1310
 line-height=150%
fo:inline end-indent=14ptRTI System
 Diagram/fo:inline
fo:inline keep-together.within-line=always
 start-indent=-14pt
fo:leader leader-pattern=dots/
fo:page-number-citation
 ref-id=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1310/
/fo:inline
/fo:basic-link
/fo:block
/fo:block
fo:block start-indent=25pt + (1 * 30pt) + 14pt
fo:block end-indent=22pt font-size=10pt
 font-weight=normal last-line-end-indent=-22pt text-align=justify
 text-align-last=justify text-indent=-14pt
fo:basic-link
 internal-destination=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1334
 line-height=150%
fo:inline end-indent=14pt System
 Components /fo:inline
fo:inline keep-together.within-line=always
 start-indent=-14pt
fo:leader leader-pattern=dots/
fo:page-number-citation
 ref-id=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1334/

Re: Why integrating DITA into XMLGraphics makes sense.

2014-05-23 Thread Luis Bernardo


I think this only shows that the person is not going to the source 
(i.e., the FOP user mailing list) to request help.


The example shown can be greatly improved by using

fo:leader width=100% leader-pattern=use-content./fo:leader

instead of

fo:leader leader-pattern=dots /

The FOP implementation repeats 3 dots (...) when using the 
leader-pattern=dots which is not very intelligent since it can lead to 
misalignment many times. But by specifying the leader content as just 
one dot the result can be greatly improved, although I agree that there 
is room for improvement in this feature.



On 5/23/14, 4:14 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote:

The conversation below shows one of the reasons why I would like to see DITA 
become part of the XMLGraphics family.
One of the most experienced and influential DITA practitioners is giving advice 
about the suitability of FOP for producing correct PDFs.

Ron
-


This is an issue with the FOP XSL-FO engine (one of many).

For top-qualify PDF output you really need to license Antenna House XSL
Formatter or RenderX XEP, both of which produce excellent results. FOP
simply has too many bugs and limitations to be generally useful for
production PDF generation using XSL-FO, unfortunately.

Cheers,


XXX



On 5/23/14, 9:54 AM, yyy [dita-users]
dita-us...@yahoogroups.com  wrote:

  
[Attachment(s) #TopText from Mark Peters included below]

  
  Hi,



Using DITA-OT 1.7 and the default org.dita.pdf2 plugin, I notice that
some TOC entries are randomly misaligned slightly. The leader extends one
or two extra dots.


For example (not sure if the formatting will come through correctly. An
image is also attached):

Chapter 1: RTI4T System Overview...11
RTI System Diagram.12
System Components...12
RTI Network Diagram...15
Summary of RTI Setup Tasks...15


Like I said, the misalignment is random. It's not all H1s or H2s, for
example, which would probably be relatively easy to fix.


Even more puzzling, the XSL-FO attributes in the temp files are identical
for nodes at the same level that have different alignments.

For example, here are two H1-level nodes. The first node is slightly
misaligned. But the indent values are identical for both nodes.

fo:block start-indent=25pt + (1 * 30pt) + 14pt
fo:block end-indent=22pt font-size=10pt
font-weight=normal last-line-end-indent=-22pt text-align=justify
text-align-last=justify text-indent=-14pt
fo:basic-link
internal-destination=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1310
line-height=150%
fo:inline end-indent=14ptRTI System
Diagram/fo:inline
fo:inline keep-together.within-line=always
start-indent=-14pt
fo:leader leader-pattern=dots/
fo:page-number-citation
ref-id=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1310/
/fo:inline
/fo:basic-link
/fo:block
/fo:block
fo:block start-indent=25pt + (1 * 30pt) + 14pt
fo:block end-indent=22pt font-size=10pt
font-weight=normal last-line-end-indent=-22pt text-align=justify
text-align-last=justify text-indent=-14pt
fo:basic-link
internal-destination=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1334
line-height=150%
fo:inline end-indent=14pt System
Components /fo:inline
fo:inline keep-together.within-line=always
start-indent=-14pt
fo:leader leader-pattern=dots/
fo:page-number-citation
ref-id=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1334/
/fo:inline
/fo:basic-link
/fo:block
/fo:block


I'm viewing the PDFs in Abobe Reader, but that hasn't made a difference
in the past.


Any idea what's going on?


Thanks for any insights.

yyy


--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email:rwhee...@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102




Re: Why integrating DITA into XMLGraphics makes sense.

2014-05-23 Thread Glenn Adams
You get what you pay for. If you want to invest resources to improve FOP,
you are free to do so.


On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 12:14 AM, Ron Wheeler 
rwhee...@artifact-software.com wrote:

  The conversation below shows one of the reasons why I would like to see DITA 
 become part of the XMLGraphics family.
 One of the most experienced and influential DITA practitioners is giving 
 advice about the suitability of FOP for producing correct PDFs.

 Ron
 -


 This is an issue with the FOP XSL-FO engine (one of many).

 For top-qualify PDF output you really need to license Antenna House XSL
 Formatter or RenderX XEP, both of which produce excellent results. FOP
 simply has too many bugs and limitations to be generally useful for
 production PDF generation using XSL-FO, unfortunately.

 Cheers,


 XXX



 On 5/23/14, 9:54 AM, yyy markpeters.w...@gmail.com 
 [dita-users]dita-us...@yahoogroups.com dita-us...@yahoogroups.com wrote:



[Attachment(s) #TopText from Mark Peters included below]


  Hi,


 Using DITA-OT 1.7 and the default org.dita.pdf2 plugin, I notice that
 some TOC entries are randomly misaligned slightly. The leader extends one
 or two extra dots.


 For example (not sure if the formatting will come through correctly. An
 image is also attached):

 Chapter 1: RTI4T System Overview...11
 RTI System Diagram.12
 System Components...12
 RTI Network Diagram...15
 Summary of RTI Setup Tasks...15


 Like I said, the misalignment is random. It's not all H1s or H2s, for
 example, which would probably be relatively easy to fix.


 Even more puzzling, the XSL-FO attributes in the temp files are identical
 for nodes at the same level that have different alignments.

 For example, here are two H1-level nodes. The first node is slightly
 misaligned. But the indent values are identical for both nodes.

 fo:block start-indent=25pt + (1 * 30pt) + 14pt
fo:block end-indent=22pt font-size=10pt
 font-weight=normal last-line-end-indent=-22pt text-align=justify
 text-align-last=justify text-indent=-14pt
fo:basic-link
 internal-destination=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1310
 line-height=150%
fo:inline end-indent=14ptRTI System
 Diagram/fo:inline
fo:inline keep-together.within-line=always
 start-indent=-14pt
fo:leader leader-pattern=dots/
fo:page-number-citation
 ref-id=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1310/
/fo:inline
/fo:basic-link
/fo:block
/fo:block
fo:block start-indent=25pt + (1 * 30pt) + 14pt
fo:block end-indent=22pt font-size=10pt
 font-weight=normal last-line-end-indent=-22pt text-align=justify
 text-align-last=justify text-indent=-14pt
fo:basic-link
 internal-destination=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1334
 line-height=150%
fo:inline end-indent=14pt System
 Components /fo:inline
fo:inline keep-together.within-line=always
 start-indent=-14pt
fo:leader leader-pattern=dots/
fo:page-number-citation
 ref-id=_OPENTOPIC_TOC_PROCESSING_d70e1334/
/fo:inline
/fo:basic-link
/fo:block
/fo:block


 I'm viewing the PDFs in Abobe Reader, but that hasn't made a difference
 in the past.


 Any idea what's going on?


 Thanks for any insights.

 yyy


  --
 Ron Wheeler
 President
 Artifact Software Inc
 email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com
 skype: ronaldmwheeler
 phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102