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 "Al-Dhahir, Haitham" <Ha...@gs.com> on 2003/04/09 16:53:50 UTC
page-position="last" - bug?
Hi,
Does FOP have a bug which prevents it from correctly processing
conditional-page-master-references with the condition page-position="last"?
I have two conditional page masters defined as follows:
<fo:page-sequence-master master-name="document-master">
<fo:repeatable-page-master-alternatives>
<fo:conditional-page-master-reference page-position="last"
master-reference="lastpage"/>
<fo:conditional-page-master-reference page-position="any"
master-reference="otherpages"/>
</fo:repeatable-page-master-alternatives>
</fo:page-sequence-master>
So what I am expecting to happen is the the last page will follow the
simple-page-master "lastpage" and the other pages (first and rest) will
follow "otherpages". What is actually happening is that all pages are
following "lastpage", i.e. every page is assumed to be the last page.
Therefore the simple-page-master "otherpages" is totally ignored.
Can anyone explain why this is happening?
Thanks,
Haitham.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: page-position="last" - bug?
Posted by Victor Mote <vi...@outfitr.com>.
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> +1
...
> > I only have one quibble & it is an amiable one -- should we
> also change to
> > comply="partial"?
Done in CVS.
Victor Mote
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: page-position="last" - bug?
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch>.
+1
On 09.04.2003 17:40:41 Victor Mote wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>
> > No, page-position="last" is still unimplemented. This will be addressed
> > in the redesign. I've just updated the compliance document with a notice
> > about page-position="last" in CVS.
>
> This is exactly what I hoped would happen with compliance.xml! Thanks for
> taking the time to fix the document -- it should help make our support more
> self-service.
>
> I only have one quibble & it is an amiable one -- should we also change to
> comply="partial"?
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: The ultimate assistant was: Re: page-position="last" - bug?
Posted by Victor Mote <vi...@outfitr.com>.
Victor Mote wrote:
> BTW, I am going to beef up the graphic image doc (see my recent reply to
> your message on fop-user re: the same). It will involve a link on the left
> menu that will say "Graphic Formats" or something similar. If the
> user can't
> translate "TIFF" to "Graphic Formats", then I doubt there is
> anything I can
> do for them anyway.
This is all done now, and I have published it (I think it will be "live" in
another couple of hours). A couple of potential problems:
1) I simply added the newly documented graphic formats to the svg.xml file.
Perhaps it should be renamed (i.e. deleted and added with a new name) to
graphics.xml.
2) I also did some more rearranging of the menu items, so that everything
that was in "Extras" is now under "Features".
I am pretty happy now with the structure and content of the user section of
the web site. There is some polishing to be done, but I can't think of any
major holes or confusing items. Obviously, on-topic user questions that
can't be answered with a self-evident link are evidence to the contrary, so
please keep updating the content.
I would probably try to merge the user & dev "examples", but since we are
using 1.0dev to build the pdfs, I am guessing that maybe we don't want all
of the examples showing up right now anyway. Does that sound right??
BTW, some of the changes I have made, esp. to the left menu are probably
matters of taste rather than principle. I hope I haven't offended anyone
else's taste in the process. I am hopeful that those changes will help the
user find the needed content more easily. I finally decided that it is
probably easier to ask forgiveness rather than permission on this stuff.
Please change any of it if you wish.
I'll probably turn my attention to the dev pages now. If that goes well, I'd
like to go fishing for some more developers.
Victor Mote
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: The ultimate assistant was: Re: page-position="last" - bug?
Posted by Victor Mote <vi...@outfitr.com>.
Clay Leeds wrote:
> This change looks good. One potential problem is if folks search the FAQ
> page (cmd/ctrl-f) for "threads", and receive "No text matched your
> search" or something.
"thread + fop" in the search box gives some useful results (right now it is
pointing to the old content).
> Some "dummy" text in parentheses could be included (not unlike META
> Keywords) in the FAQ response above the off-page link. I was going to
> give an example, but the only thing I can think of is "My PNG images
> don't work" the answer to which (download Sun's JIMI or JAI) is also
> useful for implementing other image types like PSD, TIFF and MacPaint.
> Hence, including "(JIMI also works for PSD, TIFF, Targa, etc...)" or
> something. I can see how one might get carried away with this, but my
> hope is not so much to keep the FAQ short and concise, but rather to
> lessen the number of questions asked to fop-user (or, god forbid
> fop-dev!) about whether or not FOP can handle TIF (or some other
> question no longer answered in the FAQ, but moved somewhere else).
This may boil down to a different philosophy of FAQ. I don't want to try to
include all content, or even links to all content in the FAQs. In fact, the
main thing I am trying to accomplish right now is to get all duplicate doc
removed, and use cross-refs instead. The site-wide search should cover the
case that you mention. I agree that the goal is to minimize fop-user
traffic, i.e. to help the user find it on the website first. IMO, the best
way to do this is to 1) beef up the content pages, and 2) make sure that the
content is in a place that is intuitive for the user to find. Then the FAQs
become a mere crutch. To a certain extent, our FAQs should read (as many of
them now do) Q: "How do I XYZ?" A: "See <link>doc for XYZ</link>."
BTW, I am going to beef up the graphic image doc (see my recent reply to
your message on fop-user re: the same). It will involve a link on the left
menu that will say "Graphic Formats" or something similar. If the user can't
translate "TIFF" to "Graphic Formats", then I doubt there is anything I can
do for them anyway.
Victor Mote
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The ultimate assistant was: Re: page-position="last" - bug?
Posted by Clay Leeds <cl...@medata.com>.
Victor,
Victor Mote wrote:
> OK, I have completed this work. Rather than moving the content to a general
> "solutions" page, I have moved it to a specific document where such content
> belongs. The servlet content got moved to embedding.xml, the pdf-specific
> content to output.xml, and I created a new file, fo.xml as a resource for
> xml & xsl-fo content. The FAQ still contains the old questions, but the
> answers are now links to the content. My hope is that users now have two
> ways to find the content: through the menus and through the FAQs.
This change looks good. One potential problem is if folks search the FAQ
page (cmd/ctrl-f) for "threads", and receive "No text matched your
search" or something.
Some "dummy" text in parentheses could be included (not unlike META
Keywords) in the FAQ response above the off-page link. I was going to
give an example, but the only thing I can think of is "My PNG images
don't work" the answer to which (download Sun's JIMI or JAI) is also
useful for implementing other image types like PSD, TIFF and MacPaint.
Hence, including "(JIMI also works for PSD, TIFF, Targa, etc...)" or
something. I can see how one might get carried away with this, but my
hope is not so much to keep the FAQ short and concise, but rather to
lessen the number of questions asked to fop-user (or, god forbid
fop-dev!) about whether or not FOP can handle TIF (or some other
question no longer answered in the FAQ, but moved somewhere else).
This brings to mind searching the phone book for the "Cinema" entry,
only to be re-directed to "Movie Theater"... At least with the web, it's
just a click...
--
Clay Leeds - cleeds@medata.com
Web Developer - Medata, Inc. - http://www.medata.com
PGP Public Key: https://mail.medata.com/pgp/cleeds.asc
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: The ultimate assistant was: Re: page-position="last" - bug?
Posted by Victor Mote <vi...@outfitr.com>.
Victor Mote wrote:
> J.Pietschmann wrote:
>
> > The majority of newbies starts with a problem and seeks a solution.
> > Parts of the FAQ, in particular section 8, are problem and task
> > oriented for exactly this reason. I think it would be a good idea
> > to have a "solutions" page where the code and detailed explanations
> > from sections 4 (servlet), 6.3-6.6 and 8 can be factored out so that
> > the FAQ can be made shorter by pointing to the more voluminous
> > articles there. This would allow more alias descriptions for common
> > problems.
>
> I agree -- it is on its way.
OK, I have completed this work. Rather than moving the content to a general
"solutions" page, I have moved it to a specific document where such content
belongs. The servlet content got moved to embedding.xml, the pdf-specific
content to output.xml, and I created a new file, fo.xml as a resource for
xml & xsl-fo content. The FAQ still contains the old questions, but the
answers are now links to the content. My hope is that users now have two
ways to find the content: through the menus and through the FAQs.
As always, please let me know if this does not meet with your approval.
I have "refresh"ed the web site, so the new scheme can be viewed from the
link at forrestbot.cocoondev.org. I have some unrelated content changes to
make later today, after which I will publish.
Two caveats:
1) the embedding page may need some reorganization. I am pretty weak with
this content, but it seems to me that the "servlet" topic is a subset of the
bigger "embedding" topic. So some content is specific to servlets, other is
more general to embedding, including servlets. I suspect that embedding.xml
needs to be rearranged a bit to make this more clear.
2) I changed a bunch of the ids on the faq page, mostly to change
underscore characters (_) to hyphens (-) so that the related URLs are more
readable in emails. I apologize for the inconvenience. I don't intend to
make a habit of it, but I thought this warranted the change.
Victor Mote
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: The ultimate assistant was: Re: page-position="last" - bug?
Posted by Victor Mote <vi...@outfitr.com>.
J.Pietschmann wrote:
> The majority of newbies starts with a problem and seeks a solution.
> Parts of the FAQ, in particular section 8, are problem and task
> oriented for exactly this reason. I think it would be a good idea
> to have a "solutions" page where the code and detailed explanations
> from sections 4 (servlet), 6.3-6.6 and 8 can be factored out so that
> the FAQ can be made shorter by pointing to the more voluminous
> articles there. This would allow more alias descriptions for common
> problems.
I agree -- it is on its way.
Victor Mote
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
The ultimate assistant was: Re: page-position="last" - bug?
Posted by "J.Pietschmann" <j3...@yahoo.de>.
Clay Leeds wrote:
> ON a side-note, it'd be bitchin if we had some sort of nifty "FOP Answer
> Wizard" on the site, where one could posit: Has feature X been
> implemented?" and it would search the compliance.xml document for a
> "yes" in the supported column.
If you know the exact name of the element/property, getting the
page in a browser and hitting ctrl-f is your wizard.
Implementing a wizard where you don't need to know the exact name
is reaching for the holy grail of AI research. Apart from this,
people will ask for all kind of (mis)features of related techs,
like why FOP doesn't accept , -- in comments, SVG gradients,
xsl:script, SAX1 and where the memory is gone.
The majority of newbies starts with a problem and seeks a solution.
Parts of the FAQ, in particular section 8, are problem and task
oriented for exactly this reason. I think it would be a good idea
to have a "solutions" page where the code and detailed explanations
from sections 4 (servlet), 6.3-6.6 and 8 can be factored out so that
the FAQ can be made shorter by pointing to the more voluminous
articles there. This would allow more alias descriptions for common
problems.
The slightly more advanced semi-noobs who think they can solve the problem
on their own but can't quite get it working are harder to deal with. There
is nothing worse than something which looks like an "almost there"
solution, because it's almost always a dead end (no offense, but the recent
question about manipulating the area tree for rendering a SVG into PDF is
an excellent example). The worst obstacle is the chicken effect: like
chicken accepting an old boot as their mother if it is properly introduced,
most people stick to the patters they used to get their equivalent of
"Hello World" working. In this cases the wrong approach to the problem is
the problem, but because there are so much wrong approaches it is difficult
to provide effective help: first the original problem has to be
reestablished. Occasionally the chicken effect causes enough users to
follow the same wrong path, but in the XSLT/FO area self-taught users seem
still to be the majority.
J.Pietschmann
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: page-position="last" - bug?
Posted by Victor Mote <vi...@outfitr.com>.
Clay Leeds wrote:
> That said, it took me a while to figure where the IMPLEMENTED &
> LIMITATIONS sections went. Why? I'd forgotten the new name/page for the
> "Implemented" & "Limitations" sections. Since the goal of FOP is
> compliance to the XSL-FO spec, this is an appropriate name. However, I
> don't think "Compliance" is very descriptive to the throngs of every day
> users of FOP. Perhaps something can be done to help people understand
> that "Compliance" infers "Implemented & un-Implemented portions XSL-FO"
> or something. Ideas?
You may be right, but I don't have any ideas about how to make this more
clear. FOP's feature set consists of 3 areas: 1) standards compliance, 2)
output format support, and 3) extensions. I now have menu groupings that
express this more-or-less (extensions has its own menu grouping). Anybody
using FOP understands (or needs to understand) that it is primarily
standards-driven. I think that users will eventually accept and find
"compliance" under the "features" menu grouping. In other words, I think
that this is a short-term problem that doesn't really have a good solution.
If anyone has some better descriptive term, I certainly don't mind
considering it.
> ON a side-note, it'd be bitchin if we had some sort of nifty "FOP Answer
> Wizard" on the site, where one could posit: Has feature X been
> implemented?" and it would search the compliance.xml document for a
> "yes" in the supported column.
I think we might get something like this from forrest eventually. In the
meantime, go to the "Search" in the upper right corner and enter
"page-position". I think the results there are sufficient for what we need.
> BTW, on compliance.html, under "Pagination and Layout Properties" the
> property "page-position - §7.25.14" the support:extended field indicates
> "yes" and there is no "note" indicating that page-postion="last" is not
> implemented. Does someone need to make a note of the "last" issue, or am
> I looking at the wrong place?
You are looking in the right place. The conversation that Jeremias & I had
about this revolved around the fact that he has corrected this in the CVS
repository. There are several intermediate steps that are required before it
actually shows up on our published website. You will probably see the new
content within the next few days.
Victor Mote
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: page-position="last" - bug?
Posted by Clay Leeds <cl...@medata.com>.
On 4/9/2003 8:40 AM, Victor Mote wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
>
>>No, page-position="last" is still unimplemented. This will be addressed
>>in the redesign. I've just updated the compliance document with a notice
>>about page-position="last" in CVS.
>
> This is exactly what I hoped would happen with compliance.xml! Thanks for
> taking the time to fix the document -- it should help make our support more
> self-service.
>
> I only have one quibble & it is an amiable one -- should we also change to
> comply="partial"?
>
> Victor Mote
First of all, I think the site has greatly improved from where it was
before (congrats to Victor and the others (?) who've worked hard to make
it happen). and thanks!
That said, it took me a while to figure where the IMPLEMENTED &
LIMITATIONS sections went. Why? I'd forgotten the new name/page for the
"Implemented" & "Limitations" sections. Since the goal of FOP is
compliance to the XSL-FO spec, this is an appropriate name. However, I
don't think "Compliance" is very descriptive to the throngs of every day
users of FOP. Perhaps something can be done to help people understand
that "Compliance" infers "Implemented & un-Implemented portions XSL-FO"
or something. Ideas?
In case anyone was wondering, here's what the page used to look like
(watch wrap):
http://216.239.39.100/search?q=cache:YqKKqFncbCcC:xml.apache.org/fop/implemented.html+FOP+implemented&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
(or you could google for "FOP implemented"--that's the first time I've
used "google" as a verb--feels weird).
ON a side-note, it'd be bitchin if we had some sort of nifty "FOP Answer
Wizard" on the site, where one could posit: Has feature X been
implemented?" and it would search the compliance.xml document for a
"yes" in the supported column.
BTW, on compliance.html, under "Pagination and Layout Properties" the
property "page-position - §7.25.14" the support:extended field indicates
"yes" and there is no "note" indicating that page-postion="last" is not
implemented. Does someone need to make a note of the "last" issue, or am
I looking at the wrong place?
--
Clay Leeds - cleeds@medata.com
Web Developer - Medata, Inc. - http://www.medata.com
PGP Public Key: https://mail.medata.com/pgp/cleeds.asc
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: page-position="last" - bug?
Posted by Victor Mote <vi...@outfitr.com>.
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> No, page-position="last" is still unimplemented. This will be addressed
> in the redesign. I've just updated the compliance document with a notice
> about page-position="last" in CVS.
This is exactly what I hoped would happen with compliance.xml! Thanks for
taking the time to fix the document -- it should help make our support more
self-service.
I only have one quibble & it is an amiable one -- should we also change to
comply="partial"?
Victor Mote
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: page-position="last" - bug?
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch>.
No, page-position="last" is still unimplemented. This will be addressed
in the redesign. I've just updated the compliance document with a notice
about page-position="last" in CVS.
On 09.04.2003 17:13:47 Clay Leeds wrote:
> Haitham,
>
> On 4/9/2003 7:53 AM, Al-Dhahir, Haitham wrote:
> > Does FOP have a bug which prevents it from correctly processing
> > conditional-page-master-references with the condition page-position="last"?
> > I have two conditional page masters defined as follows:
>
> As far as I know, page-position="last" (or "position(.=last())" as I
> believe XPath would prefer) is not supported. Then again, it might've
> been more recently added. However, I'm not certain which build has it,
> as the good fop-dev folks have created this beautiful page:
>
> http://xml.apache.org/fop/compliance.html
>
> The reason there's a question, is that this page may be pre-mature
> (page-position might've been added to a version of CVS or 0.20.5rc2 or
> 0.20.5rc). I believe there will be a release shortly of 0.20.5rc3 (which
> I'm told doesn't have some of the nasty bugs--in my opinion) that
> 0.20.5rc2 has.
>
> Someone "in the know" will undoubtedly provide more information shortly
> (unless they decide to spend the time releasing 0.20.5rc3 ;-p)
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: page-position="last" - bug?
Posted by Clay Leeds <cl...@medata.com>.
Haitham,
On 4/9/2003 7:53 AM, Al-Dhahir, Haitham wrote:
> Does FOP have a bug which prevents it from correctly processing
> conditional-page-master-references with the condition page-position="last"?
> I have two conditional page masters defined as follows:
As far as I know, page-position="last" (or "position(.=last())" as I
believe XPath would prefer) is not supported. Then again, it might've
been more recently added. However, I'm not certain which build has it,
as the good fop-dev folks have created this beautiful page:
http://xml.apache.org/fop/compliance.html
The reason there's a question, is that this page may be pre-mature
(page-position might've been added to a version of CVS or 0.20.5rc2 or
0.20.5rc). I believe there will be a release shortly of 0.20.5rc3 (which
I'm told doesn't have some of the nasty bugs--in my opinion) that
0.20.5rc2 has.
Someone "in the know" will undoubtedly provide more information shortly
(unless they decide to spend the time releasing 0.20.5rc3 ;-p)
--
Clay Leeds - cleeds@medata.com
Web Developer - Medata, Inc. - http://www.medata.com
PGP Public Key: https://mail.medata.com/pgp/cleeds.asc
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: page-position="last" - bug?
Posted by Jeremias Maerki <de...@greenmail.ch>.
page-position="last" is simply not implement, yet. Sorry.
On 09.04.2003 16:53:50 Al-Dhahir, Haitham wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does FOP have a bug which prevents it from correctly processing
> conditional-page-master-references with the condition page-position="last"?
> I have two conditional page masters defined as follows:
>
> <fo:page-sequence-master master-name="document-master">
> <fo:repeatable-page-master-alternatives>
> <fo:conditional-page-master-reference page-position="last"
> master-reference="lastpage"/>
> <fo:conditional-page-master-reference page-position="any"
> master-reference="otherpages"/>
> </fo:repeatable-page-master-alternatives>
> </fo:page-sequence-master>
>
> So what I am expecting to happen is the the last page will follow the
> simple-page-master "lastpage" and the other pages (first and rest) will
> follow "otherpages". What is actually happening is that all pages are
> following "lastpage", i.e. every page is assumed to be the last page.
> Therefore the simple-page-master "otherpages" is totally ignored.
>
> Can anyone explain why this is happening?
Jeremias Maerki
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org