FOP vs XEP

[Joerg Schmitz <sc...@t-online.de>]

Hello,

I´m interested in the differences between XEP and FOP. Here is the web address of the page that tries to handle this issue.
 
(http://www.renderx.com/~renderx/Demos/CMP/)

Now, I have 2 problems with that.

First of all, I recognized that these pdf-files are built with an older version of both tools.
Surely the results are now a bit different. So, right now I am going to transform the Fo-Files with the
up-to-date-versions of both Tools ... having gone through some of these files, it looks like its gonna be a very strainous work.
Has anyone got an idea or know of any other web site that handles this topic??
I would be more than thankful to get the address ;o)

My other problem is, that I am not sure about the objectivity of that comparison, because it is on the site of RenderX, 
and I was somehow inclined to believe that Renderx was  only trying to portray a better image than Apache.
Could it be possible, that - if Apache would have such a comparison on their page - the test cases chosen 
would have been different??

Thank you very much for all hints.
Joerg

Re: FOP vs XEP

[Sebastian Rahtz <se...@computing-services.oxford.ac.uk>]

I think that comparing FOP and XEP at this point is fairly
meaningless. It is clear that FOP is moving as fast as it can, and
aiming at full conformance, as is XEP. If you find a feature that *is*
done in XEP but not in FOP, its not because FOP isnt intending to do
it.

Nor would I (yet) compare speed. What I _would_ compare is quality
of pagination, paragraph makeup, hyphenation etc. Thats probably where
you will see diffences - though I have no idea which system will do better!


Sebastian



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

Re: FOP vs XEP

[Ar...@chebucto.ns.ca]

Quoting Joerg Schmitz <sc...@t-online.de>:

> My other problem is, that I am not sure about the objectivity of that =
> comparison, because it is on the site of RenderX,=20
> and I was somehow inclined to believe that Renderx was  only trying to =
> portray a better image than Apache.
> Could it be possible, that - if Apache would have such a comparison on =
> their page - the test cases chosen=20
> would have been different??

I got a little bit upset about this myself a number of months ago, and
participated in a civil exchange of email with RenderX to clarify the issue. I
have also talked to several of the key RenderX people, face-to-face, and this
subject was discussed again. My conclusion is that the tests were well-meant,
and not slanted. In some cases the tests were in fact tweaked so that FOP could
run them - feature support in XEP is generally more complete than in FOP.

I was also given to understand that many RenderX clients specifically ask how
their product compares to FOP - under the circumstances a comparison test seems
logical.

Now that third-party tests are beginning to appear, anyone who wants to run a
comparison test will have a neutral way of doing so.

Hope this clarifies things a bit.
Regards,
Arved Sandstrom


---------------------------------------------------------------
 This mail was sent through the Nova Scotia Provincial Server, 
 with technical resources provided by Chebucto Community Net.
 http://nsaccess.ns.ca/mail/         http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/


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