docbook-apps

[Moving to docbook-apps which is appropriate forum for tools specific
questions...]

Roman Banks wrote:
> I attempt to improve the output documents (compiled with xsltproc and FOP 0.93), and I wonder whether it is possible
> to improve the layout of RTFs. They look terrible: list numbering
> problem (restarting numbering, graphics is numbered as a list item);
> graphics size is non-proportional, moved to the right, tables are smashed. Is there any way to improve this layout via stylesheet
> customization? I was also advised by someone to use OpenJade to compile RTF. Is it really better than FOP?

RTF backend in FOP is really lacking many features. Instead you can use
XFC (http://www.xmlmind.com/foconverter/) -- it works more or less well
with standard output from DocBook stylesheets.

Regarding OpenJade -- while it can give you satisfactory RTF output I
think that whole DSSSL technology is falling down and as it is used by
less and less people it will be harder to get help from other users.
(And I'm saying this even if I have to admit that in some aspects DSSSL
is much elegant then XSLT+XSL-FO).

--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jirka Kosek e-mail: jirka@kosek.cz http://xmlguru.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------
Professional XML consulting and training services
DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing
------------------------------------------------------------------
OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 member
------------------------------------------------------------------

Quoting Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>:

> Regarding OpenJade -- while it can give you satisfactory RTF output I
> think that whole DSSSL technology is falling down and as it is used by
> less and less people it will be harder to get help from other users.
> (And I'm saying this even if I have to admit that in some aspects DSSSL
> is much elegant then XSLT+XSL-FO).
>

Maybe I just took you wrong but I wouldn't claim that DSSSL technology
is "falling down". It is stable in a positive sense, although it is no
longer evolving. I still write all scientific manuscripts in SGML and
process them with the DSSSL stylesheets because the publishers want
word processor files, not PDFs. So the question is whether the default
stylesheets do what you need with a minimum number of tweaks. If yes,
it is a possible route to explore. If no, you're pretty much on your
own, although a few DSSSL fossils still hang out :-)

regards,
Markus

--
Markus Hoenicka
markus.hoenicka@cats.de
(Spam-protected email: replace the quadrupeds with "mhoenicka")
http://www.mhoenicka.de

Dear DSSSL fossil :-)

Markus Hoenicka wrote:
> I still write all scientific manuscripts in SGML and
> process them with the DSSSL stylesheets because the publishers want word
> processor files, not PDFs. So the question is whether the default
> stylesheets do what you need with a minimum number of tweaks.

As a 'real' DSSSL user, I'd be interested in your take on the XFC
product Markus? Does it meet your needs?

regards



--
Dave Pawson
XSLT, XSL-FO and Docbook FAQ
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Quoting Dave Pawson <davep@dpawson.co.uk>:

> As a 'real' DSSSL user, I'd be interested in your take on the XFC
> product Markus? Does it meet your needs?
>

First of all I'd like to point out that I use XML/XSLT as well. I've
migrated most software manuals that I maintain to DocBook XML as I
don't need word processor output for them. So, in a way, I'm just a
casual fossil :-)

I've never tested XFC because it is not free (as in freedom). Statements like:

"Note to Personal Edition users: Personal Edition license terms have
changed drastically starting with version 4.0. Except in a few special
cases Personal Edition may no longer be used for professional
activities."

(http://www.xmlmind.com/foconverter/, accessed 2007-11-12)

lend some credibility to my fears that you should never build your
software stack on commercial applications unless you have the monies
to do so. I'm still struggling to replace the last two commercial apps
that I have to use (one for plotting graphs, and one for doing
statistics), and it is unlikely that I'll add more commercial apps,
regardless of how well they may perform.

regards,
Markus


--
Markus Hoenicka
markus.hoenicka@cats.de
(Spam-protected email: replace the quadrupeds with "mhoenicka")
http://www.mhoenicka.de