xmlgraphics-fop-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com>
Subject Re: XSL vs. FOP [was: Re: pagenumbering]
Date Wed, 31 Aug 2011 16:19:21 GMT
I completely agree with the last sentence in your email. When I talk about
"mis-spending" time, I am referring to discussions about the process of
creating a valid XSLFO file. However, that is just my opinion. Someone else
made the decision to include the XML via XSLT to XSLFO process in FOP, so we
have to live with that. But since that is just a convenience function in
FOP, and not an aspect of the core engine of FOP, I find discussions of the
XML via XSTL to XSLFO process to be a distraction from the core features of
FOP. If it had been my decision, I would not have included that convenience
function in FOP, but that's irrelevant at this point.

G.

P.S. Though I wasn't a member of the XSL WG, I was an active participant of
the XSL-FO subgroup from the time of its inauguration to the publishing of
XSL 1.0. Prior to that I was an active participant in ISO SC18/WG8 in
developing ISO/IEC 10179 Document Style Semantics and Specification Language
(DSSSL), which was the logical precursor to both XSLT and XSL-FO. Indeed, I
was an early proponent of separating the transformation and formatting
aspects of DSSSL that was eventually translated into separate XSLT and
XSL-FO specs.

On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:36 AM, Eric Douglas <edouglas@blockhouse.com>wrote:

> **
> Once someone has valid XSLFO and they're not getting the expected output
> then it's an FOP question.
>
>  ------------------------------
> *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]
>
> Christopher,
>
> 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
> related.
>
> 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.
>
> G.
>
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Christopher R. Maden <crism@maden.org>wrote:
>
>> 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 XSL
>> 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/ >) covers
>> all of XSL, including XSL-FO.
>>
>> We’ve previously had discussions on this list about allowing XML+XSLT as
>> 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 operation
>> specifically.
>>
>> > the correct answer is that you need to use the initial-page-number
>> > property on fo:page-sequence to specify a different starting number
>> > than is generated by "auto";
>> >
>> > see http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xsl11-20061205/#initial-page-number
>> > and and
>> > http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xsl11-20061205/#fo_page-sequence for
>> > details;
>>
>> Yes, and I apologize for not taking the time to look up the references
>> that Theresa needs.
>>
>> ~Chris
>>
>> [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 resembling
>> ignorance.  I have simply attempted to be somewhat detailed and pedantic
>> 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 all
>>  free Americans pause.” — Alabama Supreme Court, 1955
>>  (Pike v. Southern Bell Tel. & Telegraph, 81 So.2d 254)
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org
>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message