docbook-apps

  • 1.  FO processor support

    Posted 03-12-2008 12:04
    As I work on porting the XSLT 1.0 stylesheets to XSLT 2.0, I find
    workarounds, mostly for FOP and PassiveTeX scattered throughout. Does
    anyone know if these are still necessary?

    Be seeing you,
    norm

    --
    Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Man is an intellectual animal, and
    http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | therefore an everlasting
    Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | contradiction to himself. His
    | senses centre in himself, his
    | ideas reach to the ends of the
    | universe; so that he is torn to
    | pieces between the two, without a
    | possibility of its ever being
    | otherwise.-- Hazlitt



  • 2.  Re: [docbook-apps] FO processor support

    Posted 03-12-2008 15:43
    Norman Walsh wrote:
    > As I work on porting the XSLT 1.0 stylesheets to XSLT 2.0, I find
    > workarounds, mostly for FOP and PassiveTeX scattered throughout. Does
    > anyone know if these are still necessary?

    Is any list or synthetic view of the workarounds available somewhere? Or
    I guess it can be obtained simply by grepping for fop.extensions.
    I’ll try to have a look but lacking of experience with both XSLT and
    DocBook I can’t promise anything.

    Vincent


    --
    Vincent Hennebert Anyware Technologies
    http://people.apache.org/~vhennebert http://www.anyware-tech.com
    Apache FOP Committer FOP Development/Consulting



  • 3.  Re: [docbook-apps] FO processor support

    Posted 03-12-2008 16:44
    Hi Norm,
    PassiveTeX is no longer supported in the DocBook stylesheets. It isn't
    maintained and it fell behind. Those can all be ripped out.

    I would say keep the fop1.extensions, as those are in current use. I think
    anyone using fop 0.20.5 (the old fop.extensions) should just upgrade if they
    go with XSLT 2.0.

    Bob Stayton
    Sagehill Enterprises
    bobs@sagehill.net





  • 4.  Re: [docbook-apps] FO processor support

    Posted 03-17-2008 11:36
      |   view attached
    Hi,

    Norman Walsh wrote:
    > As I work on porting the XSLT 1.0 stylesheets to XSLT 2.0, I find
    > workarounds, mostly for FOP and PassiveTeX scattered throughout. Does
    > anyone know if these are still necessary?

    I had a look at the 1.73.2 stylesheets and can provide some details
    about the workarounds still needed by the FOP 1.x branch (version 0.93
    and later). Having found no development targetted list on Sourceforge
    I guess this list is the appropriate one.

    I worked from the released 1.73.2 version of the stylesheets. I made
    a grep for ‘fop.extensions’ in the fo/*.xsl files and the line numbers
    given below correspond to the lines where this term was found. If for
    whatever reason the lines don’t match they can be retrieved by searching
    for ‘fop.extensions’ from the beginning of each file.

    There’s nothing to add that’s specific to the fop1.extensions parameter;
    this means that, either the fop.extensions parameter is present at the
    same place and the comment available for this parameter also applies to
    the fop1 parameter. Or the specific behaviour that’s implemented at that
    place must be kepts as is.

    The results are in the attached text file. If there’s any question, just
    ask.

    I hope this helps,
    Vincent


    --
    Vincent Hennebert Anyware Technologies
    http://people.apache.org/~vhennebert http://www.anyware-tech.com
    Apache FOP Committer FOP Development/Consulting

    Attachment(s)