cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Piroumian Konstantin <>
Subject RE: iText jars
Date Thu, 05 Sep 2002 07:34:44 GMT
> From: J.Pietschmann [] 
> wrote:
> >>The second question is: if anybody already tried this 
> serializer? Does it
> >>solve the problems with graphics and tables that happen with FOP? 
> > 
> > 
> > It should... I have heard that iText is much faster and 
> comes with much more 
> > features. you might want to have a look at their website.
> Ahem, actually it hasn't "much more features", just different ones.
> The XML is basically some XMLified PDF, and if you know PostScript
> you know what this means. You can place everything everywhere, but
> this also means you have a lot of low-level work to do yourself
> which FOP would do for you. And, I'm not aware that iText does
> hyphenation and such higher-level tasks.

Don't both FOP and iText implement the same specification? Why would there
be difference in functionality?

> IText is a great tool if you want to reproduce a complex form
> with few text and a lot of boxes which must be placed at certain
> positions anyway, or if you have to write a report which is a
> 300page table with customer names and sales figures. It is less
> suited for PDFing software manuals.

Ok. I just need a very simple page with a logo. And I know that there were
problems with FOP and graphics (e.g. take a look at the Forrest's Primer: and compare it with its PDF
version). The speed and advanced features doesn't matter for me. So, to
rephrase the question: would I have less problems with images if I use iText
instead of FOP?

Thanks for your answers.


> J.Pietschmann
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, email:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, email:

View raw message