You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org by Rainer Garus <ra...@arcor.de> on 2002/01/30 22:17:32 UTC

Re: [PATCH] Proper use of font encodings for "native" fonts

References:

[1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=100559770232644&w=2
[2] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=100790930100949&w=2
[3] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=fop-dev&m=100386481704186&w=2

In fop 0.20.x unicode characters with value greater 256 not represented in the font are substituted with the character '#'. With the patch [1] all characters not represented in the font are substituted. This makes a problem in LineArea.getCharWidth. Because the line feed character has no glyph the width of the line feed is computed to the width of the '#' character and is unequal to the space character. This is the reason for the second problem described in [2].

Attached is a simple patch for fop 0.20.3RC to solve the problem. The patch from Peter [1](together with the two updates) can now entered in cvs in the maintenance branch.

The patch [1](together with the first update in [2]) should be entered in cvs in the main branch. The design is easier to understand and the patch solves some design problems [3]. The attached patch (second update) is not necessary for the main branch in the moment. I think it is better to wait until the patch is in cvs and then to change the interface of the font subsystem. If a character is not contained in a font, the font subsystem should generate an exception. The area tree builder can then decide to substitute the character or to print a warning message.

Rainer Garus

Re: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Matt Savino <ma...@synergizethis.com>.

Well since you said please and it is a sunny day (at least in LA)...

Roland wrote:
> 
> At 11:58 AM 2/1/02 -0800, you wrote:
> >I've attached an XSLT stylesheet that we use to create a PDF version of
> >a clinical trial participant's lab report. It uses some fairly
> 
> Can you please send us an example of the generated pdf file?
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

Re: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Roland <ro...@netquant.com.br>.

At 11:58 AM 2/1/02 -0800, you wrote:
>I've attached an XSLT stylesheet that we use to create a PDF version of
>a clinical trial participant's lab report. It uses some fairly

Can you please send us an example of the generated pdf file?



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

Re: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Matt Savino <ma...@synergizethis.com>.

I've attached an XSLT stylesheet that we use to create a PDF version of
a clinical trial participant's lab report. It uses some fairly
complicated presentation logic that by necessity needs take place in the
last stage of processing. The FO output that it produces is also
somewhat involved, making use of many of the advanced features of
XSL:FO. The stylesheet represents about a man-month of work.

I sleep a lot better at night knowing that if for some reason FOP can't
meet my needs, there's a good chance I can switch over one of the
commercial FO->PDF processors without a major coding initiative. If
XSL:FO were prorietary to FOP, I would be living in fear of (1) having
to learn some new proprietary input format then (2) either weaving it
into this stylesheet or worse yet moving all this logic into some Java
class. 

In my opinion XSLT an extremely elegant presentation language. Java
seems clunky to me now. If you can manage your XML input so that it
represents the underlying structure of the data, you won't need to do
much processing at all in your stylesheet (ie - our levels are report,
study, doctor, patient, visit, test, analyte, etc.). For most of our
management reports the stylesheet is only a few templates and almost no
logic. XSLT/XPATH can be a little frustrating/intimidating when you're
first learning, especially if there's no one with experience nearby. I
have yet to find a good exhaustive XPATH reference. But it becomes more
straightforward once you learn all the shorthand. Like any good
language, after you learn a few pieces you can start guessing on the
syntax. 

We have a mirror of this stylesheet that outputs an HTML version of the
lab report. Yes it's a little bit of work to maintain both in parallel.
But I know if I really needed to (I.E. - we had 50 canned reports
instead of 6) I could come up with a system that factors out most of the
common presentation logic between HTML and FO. As far as I can see, if I
was using some straight XML->Java->PDF system like iText, I'd have to
either have my HTML generation in a JSP and my iText input creation in
some involved Java package, or try to create both outputs from some
really involved Java package. I don't think either system would be much
fun to mantain from a presentation POV. 

-Matt

Roland wrote:
> 
> At 12:59 PM 2/1/02 -0600, you wrote:
> 
> > > 2. XSLT is also kinda complicated to use, at least if you have to do
> > > complicated formatting...
> >So is any other kind of programming language.  The more complex the task,
> >the more lines of coded need to achieve the desired results.
> 
> Wrong! Look at iText http://www.lowagie.com/iText/ to see how simple their
> examples are. They build a complex table with just a few lines of java
> codes. Try doing the same with the XML/XSLT/XSL:FO approach and I guarantee
> you that the total outcome will be much more both in lines and complexity.
> I think to generate PDF with iText is as easy as generating XML from Java.
> XSLT is just a complicated language.
> 
> But I will take a closer look at our xsl files and see how and if things
> could be simplified...
> 
> Roland
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

RE: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Roland <ro...@netquant.com.br>.

At 12:59 PM 2/1/02 -0600, you wrote:

> > 2. XSLT is also kinda complicated to use, at least if you have to do
> > complicated formatting...
>So is any other kind of programming language.  The more complex the task,
>the more lines of coded need to achieve the desired results.

Wrong! Look at iText http://www.lowagie.com/iText/ to see how simple their 
examples are. They build a complex table with just a few lines of java 
codes. Try doing the same with the XML/XSLT/XSL:FO approach and I guarantee 
you that the total outcome will be much more both in lines and complexity. 
I think to generate PDF with iText is as easy as generating XML from Java. 
XSLT is just a complicated language.

But I will take a closer look at our xsl files and see how and if things 
could be simplified...

Roland

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

Re: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Patrick Andries <pa...@videotron.ca>.

Well it is also (after being suggested yesterday).

Ralph LaChance wrote:

>
>
> It does seem a shame that this entire quo vadis thread
> isn't on fop-user....
>
>         ' Best,
>         -Ralph LaChance
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>
>



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

RE: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Ralph LaChance <Ra...@compuserve.com>.


It does seem a shame that this entire quo vadis thread
isn't on fop-user....

         ' Best,
         -Ralph LaChance



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

RE: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by fred redf <po...@yahoo.fr>.

Hi Roland,

We had the very same prob cause the xsl that translate
from our XML content to FO went quite messy as we made
all modifications needed to paper export (we're
usually building 50->200 pages in our pdfs, with many
pictures, tables cause it's made of courses contents).
So we made some kind of pre-formatting in a
xmlsublanguage of our own then we actually turn
everything to fo). That's not a big prob in our
context since pdf building is almost an offline task,
made by teachers.
Cheers,
Fred.

___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.fr

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

Re: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Patrick Andries <pa...@videotron.ca>.


Ralph LaChance wrote:

> At 04:06 PM 2/1/02 -0200, you wrote:
>
>> I will nail down the weaknesses of the XML->PDF approach:
>>
>> 1. XSL:FO is a very complicated and messy language
>> 2. XSLT is also kinda complicated to use, at least if you have to do 
>> complicated formatting...
>
>
> Sometimes it seems folks assume that FO is synomous with "pdf",
> but for some of us, the point of using FO is not to create pdf output
> but to format and send xml data directly to a printer.   ;-)
>
Well, what does it take to develop an XSL-FO interpreter on a printer ? 
No need to transform to PDF or PS then.

I thought of doing it for some time, but got discouraged when an old 
Xerox guy told me that Adobe actually supplies (for free ?) their PS 
interpreter and that developing an interpeter and fine-tuning it takes a 
LOT of time.

Patrick Andries




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

RE: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by fred redf <po...@yahoo.fr>.

Forgot to say that our fo formatting would be ready in
10 years when we'll have those *good* voice
synthetizer
that are supposed to *print* our fo code according to
the XSL-FO specs. ;)
Fred.

 
 --- Ralph LaChance <Ra...@compuserve.com> a
écrit : > At 04:06 PM 2/1/02 -0200, you wrote:
> >I will nail down the weaknesses of the XML->PDF
> approach:
> >
> >1. XSL:FO is a very complicated and messy language
> >2. XSLT is also kinda complicated to use, at least
> if you have to do 
> >complicated formatting...
> 
> Sometimes it seems folks assume that FO is synomous
> with "pdf",
> but for some of us, the point of using FO is not to
> create pdf output
> but to format and send xml data directly to a
> printer.   ;-)
> 
> 
> 
>          ' Best,
>          -Ralph LaChance
> 
> 
> 
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email:
> fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>  

___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.fr

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

RE: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Ralph LaChance <Ra...@compuserve.com>.

At 04:06 PM 2/1/02 -0200, you wrote:
>I will nail down the weaknesses of the XML->PDF approach:
>
>1. XSL:FO is a very complicated and messy language
>2. XSLT is also kinda complicated to use, at least if you have to do 
>complicated formatting...

Sometimes it seems folks assume that FO is synomous with "pdf",
but for some of us, the point of using FO is not to create pdf output
but to format and send xml data directly to a printer.   ;-)



         ' Best,
         -Ralph LaChance



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

RE: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Roland <ro...@netquant.com.br>.

>
>I will nail down the weaknesses of the XML->PDF approach:
>
>1. XSL:FO is a very complicated and messy language
>2. XSLT is also kinda complicated to use, at least if you have to do 
>complicated formatting...

I'm replying to my own email adding that of course I would be glad if 
someone can show me how to make a simpler XSLT. Maybe we just didn't figure 
out how to make the XSLT simple. But please take a look at the iText 
http://www.lowagie.com/iText/ examples first. That is what I call simplicity!!!
Also keep in mind that we generate many different tables, with different 
formatting each on a single pdf document.

Best regards, Roland


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

RE: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Jim Urban <ji...@netsteps.net>.

>
> 1. XSL:FO is a very complicated and messy language
Given the power of the language, of course its complicated.  Just as
Asembler is complicated compared to basic.

> 2. XSLT is also kinda complicated to use, at least if you have to do
> complicated formatting...
So is any other kind of programming language.  The more complex the task,
the more lines of coded need to achieve the desired results.

We have reduced a huge complex XSL files down to a driver file and series of
template files.  The driver file references templates located in other XSL
template files.  These templates are then reused from document to document,
giving the applications a constant look and feel.  Our graphics designer has
taken over our FO work.  We give him the XML and tell him what the PDF
should look like and he builds the XSL file for us.  We only need to help
occasionally when the XSL requires complex programmatic logic.

I will say this. To work effectivly with XML, XST and FO, an application
should be designed around the concept.  Coming along and adding XSL:FO to an
application that does not have a standard XML definition to begin with would
be a messy task.

Jim


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

RE: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Roland <ro...@netquant.com.br>.

At 10:32 AM 2/1/02 -0600, you wrote:
>step to use XSL:FO to generate PDF since we already had XML being generated.
>One of the real blessings of this approach is our clients can customize the
>look and feel of the application by changing the XSL files without our ever
>opening a Java source file.

We also have a web based service here, and currently are using the same 
approach as you are, but the problems we encouter are the following:

If you generate XSL:FO from XML, the XSLT(stylesheet) can become very 
complicated, at least for us because:

We generate a lot of tables, and they are quite different what concerns the 
formatting/color. That means, there has to be a section in the XSLT for 
each type of table and complicated if-then-else decisions to decide which 
formatting to apply and how. Take into account also, that up to now you 
have to manually code in the column width of each column in every table for 
FOP, this is a nightmare! In other words, changing the XSLT is much, much, 
much more painfull than changing a java source file(supposing the use of 
iText).

An alternative for having a simpler XSLT, would be to encode most of the 
formatting in the XML, but then you would have XML with formatting 
information, and if you want to change the look and feel you have to change 
the java source that is generating the XML.

I think the use of XSLT is only usefull if you have a standardized look and 
feel, like every table looks the same way, etc... But even then, if 
you  decide that you need a new table it is very difficult to define a new 
formatting using XSLT to generate XSL:FO. XSL:FO is a complicated language, 
and the complexity transfers to the generating XSLT(which is cumbersome 
enough on its own), which looks like a big messy thing here at the company. 
Our XSLT files are currently VERY long and MESSY. It would be much simpler 
to code the same thing in Java, take a look at the iText page and their 
examples(http://www.lowagie.com/iText/).

And if you still need your XML, you can take this approach:

1. Generate XML from Java for whatever you need.
2. Generate the PDF from Java using iText.

I think this is probably the approach we are gonna take here...
And if you code smartly you can arrange is to also not have to change the 
java source for a change of look and feel. Just store the formatting 
information in a '.properties' file like:

tableBackGroundColor=red
tableFont=Roman8
etc...

Then you can change the look and fell by just editing that properties file...

I will nail down the weaknesses of the XML->PDF approach:

1. XSL:FO is a very complicated and messy language
2. XSLT is also kinda complicated to use, at least if you have to do 
complicated formatting...

Best regards...Roland

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

RE: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by fred redf <po...@yahoo.fr>.

Hi all,

I'm working on an e-learning at a french university.
We adopted fop the very same reason Jim has stated.
But i also use iText as a hack for some special
purposes (re-ordering/re-sizing/watermarking mostly)
I think we also made this choice "for the future" as:

- first, we have a pure xml/xsl technology system (no
transitiional xml sub-language to drive iText

- second, we can use SVG (we have a nice grpahic
designer and i can import SVG directly in my FO code)

Hope this helps, if you have to choose one of these
technologies for your project.

Dref.





--- Jim Urban <ji...@netsteps.net> a écrit : > Our
application is a servlet based web application. 
> We have adopted the MVC
> approach.  We found Cacoon over kill, so we
> implmented our own frame work.
> Our frame work requires all business components
> produce XML.  We then use
> XSL:HTML to format HTML output for the browser.  It
> was only a natural next
> step to use XSL:FO to generate PDF since we already
> had XML being generated.
> One of the real blessings of this approach is our
> clients can customize the
> look and feel of the application by changing the XSL
> files without our ever
> opening a Java source file.
> 
> It was a BIG investment and learning curve up front
> to take this approach,
> but now that we are past that phase, the return on
> the investment has
> enabled us to justify the up front expense.  Looking
> back, I think it was a
> vary sound decission.  We are in a position where
> adding WAP (WML) and a B2b
> SOAP interface are a natural extension of our
> framework, not a rewrite.
> 
> Thank yous go to not only FOP, but Xalan and Xerces
> for all the XML and XSL
> support!
> 
> Jim Urban
> Product Manager
> Netsteps Inc.
> Suite 505E
> 1 Pierce Pl.
> Itasca, IL  60143
> Voice:  (630) 250-3045 x2164
> Fax:  (630) 250-3046
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > At 08:58 PM 1/29/02 -0500, you wrote:
> > >I would like to know why FOP enthousiast (I am
> one) are using FO rather
> > >than products such as Crystal Reports or other
> such software (anyone
> > >Jetfoms ?). Just for the fun of playing with new
> technology ?
> >
> 
> 
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email:
> fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>  

___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.fr

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

RE: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Jim Urban <ji...@netsteps.net>.

Our application is a servlet based web application.  We have adopted the MVC
approach.  We found Cacoon over kill, so we implmented our own frame work.
Our frame work requires all business components produce XML.  We then use
XSL:HTML to format HTML output for the browser.  It was only a natural next
step to use XSL:FO to generate PDF since we already had XML being generated.
One of the real blessings of this approach is our clients can customize the
look and feel of the application by changing the XSL files without our ever
opening a Java source file.

It was a BIG investment and learning curve up front to take this approach,
but now that we are past that phase, the return on the investment has
enabled us to justify the up front expense.  Looking back, I think it was a
vary sound decission.  We are in a position where adding WAP (WML) and a B2b
SOAP interface are a natural extension of our framework, not a rewrite.

Thank yous go to not only FOP, but Xalan and Xerces for all the XML and XSL
support!

Jim Urban
Product Manager
Netsteps Inc.
Suite 505E
1 Pierce Pl.
Itasca, IL  60143
Voice:  (630) 250-3045 x2164
Fax:  (630) 250-3046

>
> At 08:58 PM 1/29/02 -0500, you wrote:
> >I would like to know why FOP enthousiast (I am one) are using FO rather
> >than products such as Crystal Reports or other such software (anyone
> >Jetfoms ?). Just for the fun of playing with new technology ?
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

Re: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Roland <ro...@netquant.com.br>.

At 08:58 PM 1/29/02 -0500, you wrote:
>I would like to know why FOP enthousiast (I am one) are using FO rather 
>than products such as Crystal Reports or other such software (anyone 
>Jetfoms ?). Just for the fun of playing with new technology ?

Good question,
here where I work I'm thinking about switching to iText instead 
http://www.lowagie.com/iText/
It's a much simpler way to generate pdf from Java. The truth is that xsl:fo 
is a headache to use, very complicated...

Roland

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

RE: Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Arved Sandstrom <Ar...@chebucto.ns.ca>.

Well, it wouldn't be off-topic if you pursued this on the fop-user mailing
list. :-)

Why do people use XSL-FO? Because they need high-quality printing and the
formatting vocabulary described in the XSL 1.0 Recommendation suits those
needs, AND the data to be formatted is already represented in XML. That's my
minimalist view. :-)

Regards,
Arved Sandstrom

-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Andries [mailto:patrick.andries@videotron.ca]
Sent: January 29, 2002 9:58 PM
To: fop-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Why do you use FOP instead of ...


I would like to know why FOP enthousiast (I am one) are using FO rather
than products such as Crystal Reports or other such software (anyone
Jetfoms ?). Just for the fun of playing with new technology ?

Thanks for any hints (in private since this is off-topic)

Patrick Andries


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org

Why do you use FOP instead of ...

Posted by Patrick Andries <pa...@videotron.ca>.

I would like to know why FOP enthousiast (I am one) are using FO rather 
than products such as Crystal Reports or other such software (anyone 
Jetfoms ?). Just for the fun of playing with new technology ?

Thanks for any hints (in private since this is off-topic)

Patrick Andries



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org