Re: Q: XML+XSL transforms to a print-ready format
> > > b) there remains much to do > > > > Yes. As usual and always. I think people who are writing > > HTML browsers *still* have *many* things to do. > > Don't they? > um, whats the relevance of that? If you have good lists - you have 95% of the functionality usualy requested from tables. You have tables even you don't have tables. We already got about 5 testcases from the 'outher space' when people think they need tables - and we have rendered those testcases without changing a *line* of code in the engine. Once again. The current shape of RenderX rendering engine is sufficient to start using it in the production environment. Sure - no purpose at all of XSL FO renderer that is not supporting lists and/or images. > > What is the point here ? > correct me if I am wrong, but you don't seem to have tackled tables > yet. to me, thats so crucial I cannot regard a product without it as > seriously useful. And next day after we'l support tables somebody would clame that because it is not supporting 'spacer' tag, our rendering is 'incomplete' ? And after supporting that hypotetical 'spacer' tag somebody else will come and say that because rendering engine does not supports 'nice' page numbering in the situation when the page has a landscape orientation - it is imcomplete? The glass is half full ( and it will *never* be full enough - like HTML experience shows us). If I need to do *anything* with XML rendering - I'l pick *our* engine in a shape it has right now, then I'l start working with the vendor ( renderx ) asking for the solutions for some particular problems I may have ( even the WD provides no solutions at all ). If my vendor will be honest with me - we'l make a great progress. If my vendor will play a dirty games - I'l never win on a long run - would that vendor be big or small. This is the scemario our marketing is suggesting and this scenario is acceptable for some of our clients. Actualy, I see nothing wrong here. I was working in some different companies in different countries and most of them were using this or very similiar model. > > Could you please provide the .fo stream to be considered > > "a really convincing example of table formatting"? Just in case.... > > > no, sorry, I don't have any good examples to hand. i am sure others > do. Norm Walsh's Docbook test documents have some reasonable things Many thanks for the reference. From the end of August, we prefer to work with the materials we are taking from the 'outher space' rather than writing our own complex testcases. So far we have no significant problems with those materials. Next update of www.renderx.com may show it better. > > > and when I can buy or otherwise acquire a copy of fo2pdf, > > > > Maybe you can right now. Contact our sales. Unfortunately, > > it is not available to students, for example. > er, why ever not??? why would you NOT sell to me on the basis of my > profession?? (not that I am a student) It's the question for our marketing. Unfortunately I have nothing to do with it - I'm a developer. Actualy, I see nothing wrong here. I was working in different companies in different countries and most of them were using this or very similiar model. > > "We are bulding a new Netscape, but not a new Mozaic if > > you know enough to understand the difference". > > you are building a new web browser? i would not have guessed it from > the web site. As I told before - the text is from the 'Opportunities' page. It is kind of professional test. The renderx project is just 10% of what we are realy doing. At the moment we have about 3 know-hows and only one of them is in the rendering part. However, if you'l read carefully the information on our website, and if you are superb developer with 10+ years of intencive software development experience, who have participated in about 10 commercial projects ( like the rest of our team is ) you may figure out the rest, say 70% of the whole picture. Those who can - are welcome to the core team of renderx. Those who can not - will join us after the first round, when we'l have everything in place, including detailed explanations e t.c. I don't think we are doing it wrong. I think we are doing it right. > > > PS remember the old adage "if their web site is not valid HTML, don't buy > > > from them"? Paul, you might want to pass by validator.w3.org :-} > > > > Our .fo streams are much more valid than it could be, > i am talking about the HTML of your Web site itself, not your .fos, > which are of course excellent And I'm answering that our HTML may be 'incorrect', because it does not realy matter. Unfortunately, .fo-s were also not exellent - shame on me who have not invoked our own validating service on the example we have published there for 2 months. Thanks to Steve, who pointed us to particular problems with our columns.fo. We have it fixed, because he was having particular problems. What particular problem do you have with our HTML pages ? What browser are you using? Rgds.Paul. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= paul@xxxxxxxxx www.renderx.com www.pault.com XMLTube * Perl/JavaConnector * PerlApplicationServer =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format