xmlgraphics-fop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Palaniappan, Krishnasamy" <Pala...@diebold.com>
Subject RE: HTML to PDF (or) XML to PDF
Date Tue, 12 Dec 2000 13:45:48 GMT
Hi,
	Thanks for all your responses. However, I still am not very clear. I realize that there is
a lot of software already available (and probably for a while now) that does HTML-PDF conversion
and vice-versa. This being the case, what was the actual need for something like FOP. I am
not sure if this saves a lot of time, as XML to PDF involves:
1. XML to FO
2. FO to PDF.
while if I go the other route, it is;
1. XML to HTML 
2. HTML to PDF

I don't think the first approach saves any time over the second (atleast for the testing i
did).

Thanks for any clarifications,
Regards,
Krish

-----Original Message-----
From: Joachim Diepstraten / media access
[mailto:Joachim.Diepstraten@media-access.net]
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 3:10 AM
To: 'fop-dev@xml.apache.org'
Subject: RE: HTML to PDF (or) XML to PDF


Hi

>Can someone tell me the advantages of using one approach over  the other? I
would like to go the FOP way but just want to know the differences.

Well HTMLDoc definitly is more easy to use. As you have to rewrite your XSLT
to include FO-Commands. Also maybe HTMLDoc can overcome
some limitations which still exist in FOP.

But FOP gives you alot more control. Especially concerning paging (Doing
paging in HTML is pain as it's not a printmedia, so you can't
predict precisily on which page your content will be placed in the worst
case it's split at the worst place you can imagine between
two pages), fonts and layout.

Another advantage of FOP is once you have your stylesheet you can generate
your PDFs automatically in background.

EOF,
 J.D.

Mime
View raw message