TR: Choice of a XSL-Fo processor

["GISBERT Aurélien (DSIT-EX)" <au...@sncf.fr>]

I have to do a comparison between the different existing XSL-Fo processors.
I focused on these ones:
-FOP, Apache
-XEP, RenderX
-Antenna House XSL Processor
-PassiveTeX

Could you give me their "good and bad parts"?
Who support them?
What are the aims of each one about the XSL specification?
Finally, is there any other good XSL-Fo processors? 

I understood that these 4 XSL-Fo processors were all compliant to the basic
conformance level in the W3C recommendation, and also to some of the objects
and properties of the extended level.
 
I would like to have your opinions. I have to transform an XML document into
a PDF file, using a specific model of presentation (first page, contents,
headers, titles, ...)

Regards

-----------------------
Aurelien Gisbert
Engineer student in the INSA of Lyon, France
Internee in the SNCF, France (working with Alain Herbuel, in the DSIT-EX
section)

RE: Choice of a XSL-Fo processor

["Matthew L. Avizinis" <ml...@gleim.com>]

FWIW IMO, here's a couple things:
FOP -- Free
XEP -- >= ~$5,000
Antenna -- >= ~$1,900
PassiveTex -- don't know

FOP -- source - you can modify it / contribute to this, imho, excellent
project if you want (or have ability) to
XEP -- nope
Antenna -- nope
PassiveTex -- don't know

FOP -- support only if someone has an interest or ability to answer your
questions (many peoples questions just slide through the cracks it seems);
change lists and documentation spotty;  releases not as frequent and
development group not as active as other Apache projects.
XEP -- good support (because of the pricetag, they feel more obligated?)
Antenna -- don't know
PassiveTex -- don't know

HTH,
   Matthew L. Avizinis <ma...@gleim.com>
Gleim Publications, Inc.
   4201 NW 95th Blvd.
 Gainesville, FL 32606
(352)-375-0772 ext. 101
      www.gleim.com <http://www.gleim.com>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: GISBERT Aurélien (DSIT-EX) [mailto:aurelien.gisbert@sncf.fr]
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 5:38 AM
> To: 'fop-user@xml.apache.org'
> Subject: TR: Choice of a XSL-Fo processor
>
>
>
> I have to do a comparison between the different existing XSL-Fo
> processors.
> I focused on these ones:
> -FOP, Apache
> -XEP, RenderX
> -Antenna House XSL Processor
> -PassiveTeX
>
> Could you give me their "good and bad parts"?
> Who support them?
> What are the aims of each one about the XSL specification?
> Finally, is there any other good XSL-Fo processors?
>
> I understood that these 4 XSL-Fo processors were all compliant to
> the basic
> conformance level in the W3C recommendation, and also to some of
> the objects
> and properties of the extended level.
>
> I would like to have your opinions. I have to transform an XML
> document into
> a PDF file, using a specific model of presentation (first page, contents,
> headers, titles, ...)
>
> Regards
>
> -----------------------
> Aurelien Gisbert
> Engineer student in the INSA of Lyon, France
> Internee in the SNCF, France (working with Alain Herbuel, in the DSIT-EX
> section)