xmlgraphics-fop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Bowditch <bowditch_ch...@hotmail.com>
Subject Re: Why integrating DITA into XMLGraphics makes sense.
Date Tue, 27 May 2014 12:56:07 GMT
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is a clear sign that the DITA experts are out of date.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 
>> <rwheeler@artifact-software.com 
>> <mailto:rwheeler@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-users@yahoogroups.com>  <mailto:dita-users@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="14pt">RTI
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:rwheeler@artifact-software.com  <mailto:rwheeler@artifact-software.com>
>>>>     skype: ronaldmwheeler
>>>>     phone:866-970-2435, ext 102  <tel:866-970-2435%2C%20ext%20102>
>>>
>>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Ron Wheeler
>>     President
>>     Artifact Software Inc
>>     email:rwheeler@artifact-software.com  <mailto:rwheeler@artifact-software.com>
>>     skype: ronaldmwheeler
>>     phone:866-970-2435, ext 102  <tel:866-970-2435%2C%20ext%20102>
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Ron Wheeler
> President
> Artifact Software Inc
> email:rwheeler@artifact-software.com
> skype: ronaldmwheeler
> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102


Mime
View raw message