RE: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose

2002-05-01 Thread Keen Tim
That's a big yes from me as well. Cheers Tim > -Original Message- > From: Peter B. West [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, 1 May 2002 15:50 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary > tools propose &

Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose

2002-04-30 Thread Patrick Lanphier
We are considering using FOP in place of JReports or any other reporting tools. More needs to be written on how to use Cocoon and FOP as a true report writer. Any help would be great. I'm currently working with Corda in hopes that they will change the SVG format to inlining so that it can be eas

Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose

2002-04-30 Thread J.Pietschmann
Patrick Andries wrote: Alex McLintock wrote: I don't know about an industry analysts study of XSL:FO but we ought to be able to come up with case studies for people who have successfully used FOP. I think this is crucial. I found nothing of the sort. There was recently an announcement on the coc

Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose

2002-04-30 Thread Patrick Andries
Alex McLintock wrote: I don't know about an industry analysts study of XSL:FO but we ought to be able to come up with case studies for people who have successfully used FOP. I think this is crucial. I found nothing of the sort.

Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose

2002-04-30 Thread Alex McLintock
On Monday 29 April 2002 13:51, someone wrote: > Thank you for all these good ideas. Would anyone happen to know of an > industry analyst study on the advantages of XSL FO ? > This is to lend some credibility to my recommendation. At 05:18 30/04/2002, John Austin wrote: All of those Open Source dev

Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose

2002-04-30 Thread John Austin
On Monday 29 April 2002 13:51, you wrote: > Thank you for all these good ideas. Would anyone happen to know of an > industry analyst study on the advantages of XSL FO ? > This is to lend some credibility to my recommendation. Well, Gates and his minions are squealing like stuck pigs. Where there'

Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose

2002-04-29 Thread Patrick Andries
Thank you for all these good ideas. Would anyone happen to know of an industry analyst study on the advantages of XSL FO ? This is to lend some credibility to my recommendation.

Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose

2002-04-29 Thread Andrius Sabanas
Alex McLintock wrote: Isn't this the virtue of XSLT rather than XSL FO ? XSL:FO *is* XSLT ! One is part of the other and not totally separate! Alex Hello, Although I am not a guru of XSL*, I would dare to argue with that. In fact, XSL consists of three technologies - XSLT, XPath and XSL:FO. You

Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose

2002-04-29 Thread Alex McLintock
At 17:03 29/04/2002, you wrote: Consider that once you data is in XML you can use that same data to produce PDF, HTML VoiceML (for you automated telephone system) or SVG graphical representation of the data by just changing the stylesheet using XSLT. No need to have multiple unsynced data source

Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose

2002-04-29 Thread Markus Wiese
liche Nachricht- Von: Patrick Andries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Datum: Montag, 29. April 2002 18:05 Betreff: Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose > > >L Rutker wrote: > >> >> >> >>

Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose

2002-04-29 Thread Patrick Andries
L Rutker wrote: From: Patrick Andries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose 2) I understand that everything related with XML (XSLT/XSL-FO) has a modern flavour that few techies can resist, but what are the objectives reasons ? 3)

Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose

2002-04-29 Thread Cyril Rognon
Hi Fop-users I do agree that XML data offer interoperability and many many high feature regarding to data tranform and sync and exchange. XSL FO is really a nice solution because it helps to build paginated presentation layers that longs for a long time. But I would like to say that FO and othe

Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose

2002-04-29 Thread L Rutker
From: Patrick Andries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose 2) I understand that everything related with XML (XSLT/XSL-FO) has a modern flavour that few techies can resist, but what are the objectives reasons ? 3) Are they any adva

Re: Why is FO(P) a superior model than what most proprietary tools propose

2002-04-29 Thread Olivier Rossel
I do not know the proprietary tools. What can I say to you that will convice you? The power of standards and open-source. Standards allows interoperability. You do not need to buy the specs of any closed-source format in order to make a bridge to (let's say) PDF or RTF :-) Force of the open-sourc