xmlgraphics-fop-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Eric Douglas" <edoug...@blockhouse.com>
Subject RE: XSL vs. FOP [was: Re: pagenumbering]
Date Wed, 31 Aug 2011 12:36:58 GMT
XSLFO is what you get when you combine XSLT with XML.
XSLFO is an extension of XSLT and includes XSLT commands.
XSLFO is as unrelated to FOP as XSLT when you're talking about it's
creation for expected output.
If you want only FOP related questions they should be about XSLFO
commands and only as far as whether they're supported and whether
they're producing the expected output.
There is likely a better place for questions about how to generate XSLT
or XSLFO which should produce particular output which don't question
whether FOP is processing it correctly, and you're welcome to point
people to such a place if you don't have an answer or don't feel like
answering, though I personally wouldn't mind helping if I do have an
I use FOP with XML + XSLT with embedded code.  I have had some issues
with how FOP works which require looking at the XSLFO, so I actually
split the process so I call the Java transform method twice.  One passes
the XSL on the Transformer create and the XML as input and the output is
XSLFO I can write to a file if I need.  The second transform uses no XSL
and passes the XSLFO as input and the FOP handler on the output.
If you don't want to 'misspend' any time answering questions that should
include questions about how to write XSLT or XSLFO.  Once someone has
valid XSLFO and they're not getting the expected output then it's an FOP


From: Glenn Adams [mailto:glenn@skynav.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 11:41 PM
To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Subject: Re: XSL vs. FOP [was: Re: pagenumbering]


We may be applying different ontological models here. 

I label anything having to do with XSL-FO as FO related.

I label anything having to do with XSLT as XSL related.

For me, FO related != XSL related.

In fact, there is no necessary logical connection between the two,
except insofar as FO borrows/reuses certain constructs from XSL(T), the
only one of which I know of is the number to string conversion
properties, which, coincidentally, have to do with the current subject
matter: page number generation.

In any case, by model, page number properties are FO related, not XSL

Because FOP supports both XSL(T) [indirectly} and FO, it certainly
covers both areas, but as far as I'm concerned the XSL(T) portion of it
is a convenience function, unrelated to its core functionality.

Given the amount of traffic (mis)spent on issues related to the XSL(T)
features of FOP, I often wish it did not support this convenience
function. But that's neither here nor there.


On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Christopher R. Maden <crism@maden.org>

	On 08/30/2011 10:52 AM, Glenn Adams wrote:
	> actually, this is an FO issue, not XSL, since it is FOP that
	> generates page numbers via <fo:page-number>
	XSL encompasses both Formatting Objects (sometimes "XSL-FO") and
	Tranformations (XSLT).  An FO issue *is* an XSL issue.
	It is FOP that generates page numbers, but what Theresa needed
was the
	FO instruction, which is agnostic about the software that
consumes it
	(whether FOP, RenderX, Antenna House, or anything else).
	The XSL List (<URL: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list/ >)
	all of XSL, including XSL-FO.
	We've previously had discussions on this list about allowing
	input to FOP, and the potential user confusion that results as
to what
	FOP actually does.  For similar reasons, when I reply to
questions here,
	I try to make it clear what parts are specific to FOP, and which
	questions are about XML, XSLT, or FO, and orthogonal to FOP's
	> the correct answer is that you need to use the
	> property on fo:page-sequence to specify a different starting
	> than is generated by "auto";
	> see
	> and and
	> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xsl11-20061205/#fo_page-sequence
	> details;
	Yes, and I apologize for not taking the time to look up the
	that Theresa needs.
	[Emotional content notice (since plain text is really bad at
	communicating this): I want to be very clear that I am not
attacking or
	criticizing Glenn or Theresa.  And certainly, I've known Glenn
by his
	work for far too long to accuse him of anything remotely
	ignorance.  I have simply attempted to be somewhat detailed and
	here for maximal clarity to everyone who might read this.]
	Chris Maden, text nerd  <URL: http://crism.maden.org/ >
	"The present tendency and drift towards the Police State gives
	 free Americans pause." - Alabama Supreme Court, 1955
	 (Pike v. Southern Bell Tel. & Telegraph, 81 So.2d 254)
	To unsubscribe, e-mail:
	For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message