docbook-apps

Hi Daniel,
I'm afraid that both the line numbering feature and the inserted callouts
feature are both implemented as Java extensions in Xalan and Saxon, and
won't work with xsltproc.

I understand your quandary about needing xsltproc's XInclude feature as
well. One solution is to process the XIncludes with xmllint to create a
temp file, and process the temp file with Saxon with extensions to get the
callouts or line numbers.

Bob Stayton
Sagehill Enterprises
DocBook Consulting
bobs@sagehill.net


----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Leidert" <daniel.leidert.spam@gmx.net>
To: <docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 5:54 PM
Subject: [docbook-apps] callout-lists and HTML/PDF creation with
xsltproc/libxslt


> Hello,
>
> When I try to process a <screenco> or <programlistingco> element with
> xsltproc to output HTML, it works, except that the numbers in the
> <screen> or <programlisting> area are missing [1]. If I now try to
> create FO output using the docbook-xsl stylesheets and xsltproc, it
> fails. Are the FO-stylesheets only behind the HTML stylesheets or are
> there problems with callouts for FO-output, that cannot be solved
> without a special extension?
>
> My problem is, that I would like to comment some screen-output, but the
> linenumbering attribute needs an extension, libxslt does not provide,
> and the PDF output seems to fail for callouts and shows the explained
> problem for HTML. But I cannot use Saxon or Xalan, because Xerces seems
> to miss support for xpointer(), which I need for some includes (system
> is a Debian Sid).
>
> [1] If I process the docbook-defguide with xsltproc, it produces the
> correct output for the screenco-example - if I process the
> screenco/example1.xml alone, it shows the same problem - the numbers are
> missing in the <screen>-area.
>
> Regards, Daniel
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-apps-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docbook-apps-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>
>
>

Am Montag, den 26.02.2007, 22:14 -0800 schrieb Bob Stayton:

> I'm afraid that both the line numbering feature and the inserted callouts
> feature are both implemented as Java extensions in Xalan and Saxon, and
> won't work with xsltproc.

Hm. I know changed to use <screen> with <co> instead of <screenco> or
<programlistingco> which seems to work fine except a bug in the PDF
output (callout graphics, that should be put besides each other are put
under each other). I attached a sample output
of ../docbook/trunk/defguide/en/refpages/elements/screenco/example.1.gen
(as XML article) that shows this bug - I guess it's really a bug in the
FO stylesheets, because HTML output works fine.

> I understand your quandary about needing xsltproc's XInclude feature as
> well. One solution is to process the XIncludes with xmllint to create a
> temp file, and process the temp file with Saxon with extensions to get the
> callouts or line numbers.

Yeah. This could have been a solution :) I just have one problem with
that: The extensions do not exist on Debian systems. Unfortunately I
cannot provide them with the docbook-xsl package. Maybe it could be a
way to provide the extensions (and only the extensions, not the whole
saxon.jar) as separate java archive (something like
saxon-nwalsh-ext.jar). But I don't know, if this is possible or if the
Saxon version in docbook-xsl's SVN is heavily patched. I should ask our
pkg-java team. They should probably know.

Thanks for your answer.

Regards, Daniel

</programlistingco></screenco></co></screen>

Daniel Leidert <daniel.leidert.spam@gmx.net>, 2007-02-27 08:59 +0100:

> Yeah. This could have been a solution :) I just have one problem with
> that: The extensions do not exist on Debian systems. Unfortunately I
> cannot provide them with the docbook-xsl package. Maybe it could be a
> way to provide the extensions (and only the extensions, not the whole
> saxon.jar) as separate java archive (something like
> saxon-nwalsh-ext.jar). But I don't know, if this is possible or if the
> Saxon version in docbook-xsl's SVN is heavily patched.

We don't actually have a Saxon version in our svn -- the only
thing we have are source files for the DocBook XSL Java
extensions, which is what the jar files in docbook-xsl are built
from. Users need to separately install Saxon (for example, Debian
users need to install libsaxon-java) in order to use Saxon.

> I should ask our pkg-java team. They should probably know.

If you can, please forward or Cc me on any correspondence you have
with them about the DocBook XSL Java extensions. Putting together
a upstream package of just the extensions separate from the
stylesheets should not be too much work, but I want to make sure
it'll meet whatever the Java packaging policy guidelines Debian
and other distros may have.

--Mike

Am Dienstag, den 27.02.2007, 18:38 +0900 schrieb Michael(tm) Smith:
> Daniel Leidert <daniel.leidert.spam@gmx.net>, 2007-02-27 08:59 +0100:
>
> > Yeah. This could have been a solution :) I just have one problem with
> > that: The extensions do not exist on Debian systems. Unfortunately I
> > cannot provide them with the docbook-xsl package. Maybe it could be a
> > way to provide the extensions (and only the extensions, not the whole
> > saxon.jar) as separate java archive (something like
> > saxon-nwalsh-ext.jar). But I don't know, if this is possible or if the
> > Saxon version in docbook-xsl's SVN is heavily patched.
>
> We don't actually have a Saxon version in our svn -- the only
> thing we have are source files for the DocBook XSL Java
> extensions, which is what the jar files in docbook-xsl are built
> from. Users need to separately install Saxon (for example, Debian
> users need to install libsaxon-java) in order to use Saxon.

Yes. I already noticed that. IMO that should ease the problem.

> > I should ask our pkg-java team. They should probably know.
>
> If you can, please forward or Cc me on any correspondence you have
> with them about the DocBook XSL Java extensions. Putting together
> a upstream package of just the extensions separate from the
> stylesheets should not be too much work, but I want to make sure
> it'll meet whatever the Java packaging policy guidelines Debian
> and other distros may have.

The thread started here:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-java-maintainers/2007-February/010475.html
and is probably continued in debian-java:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-java/2007/02/msg00039.html

Regards, Daniel