FWIW IMO, here's a couple things: FOP -- Free XEP -- >= ~$5,000 Antenna -- >= ~$1,900 PassiveTex -- don't know
FOP -- source - you can modify it / contribute to this, imho, excellent project if you want (or have ability) to XEP -- nope Antenna -- nope PassiveTex -- don't know FOP -- support only if someone has an interest or ability to answer your questions (many peoples questions just slide through the cracks it seems); change lists and documentation spotty; releases not as frequent and development group not as active as other Apache projects. XEP -- good support (because of the pricetag, they feel more obligated?) Antenna -- don't know PassiveTex -- don't know HTH, Matthew L. Avizinis <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gleim Publications, Inc. 4201 NW 95th Blvd. Gainesville, FL 32606 (352)-375-0772 ext. 101 www.gleim.com <http://www.gleim.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: GISBERT Aurélien (DSIT-EX) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 5:38 AM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: TR: Choice of a XSL-Fo processor > > > > I have to do a comparison between the different existing XSL-Fo > processors. > I focused on these ones: > -FOP, Apache > -XEP, RenderX > -Antenna House XSL Processor > -PassiveTeX > > Could you give me their "good and bad parts"? > Who support them? > What are the aims of each one about the XSL specification? > Finally, is there any other good XSL-Fo processors? > > I understood that these 4 XSL-Fo processors were all compliant to > the basic > conformance level in the W3C recommendation, and also to some of > the objects > and properties of the extended level. > > I would like to have your opinions. I have to transform an XML > document into > a PDF file, using a specific model of presentation (first page, contents, > headers, titles, ...) > > Regards > > ----------------------- > Aurelien Gisbert > Engineer student in the INSA of Lyon, France > Internee in the SNCF, France (working with Alain Herbuel, in the DSIT-EX > section)
