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 Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch> on 2001/12/14 08:22:10 UTC
Re: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
On Thursday 13 December 2001 15:35, Matthias Fischer wrote:
> . . .
> My whish to Santa Clause this year: A big fat list containing all major
> graphic formats and the FO/FOP-related aspects that concern them.
> . . .
I'm skeptical: to me "big fat list" means "big maintenance work" and usually
"out-of-sync list".
I'd rather have many small, focused, self-documented, numbered XSL-FO example
files that show what works and what doesn't in FOP (note that I haven't
looked at our test files for a while - maybe it's there already?).
Maybe a live FOP system where users can post a ZIP containing XSL:FO +
graphics files and get back the PDF?
(got to tell Santa Claus about this one ;-)
Such examples could be donated by users after they find that a particular
feature works or not, with a standard mail header ([TESTDOC] ?) that would
help committers sort out these files.
Any thoughts?
--
-- Bertrand Delacrétaz, www.codeconsult.ch
-- web technologies consultant - OO, Java, XML, C++
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
Posted by Keiron Liddle <ke...@aftexsw.com>.
As you have visited the site you will know the information here:
http://xml.apache.org/fop/testing.html
This is all the information.
The plans are to get FOP to be able to run through all the tests first.
Of course if more people were involved then someone could work on
improving this.
Maybe this could be used to produce an output of information that users
could see.
On 2001.12.17 08:07 Matthias Fischer wrote:
> Great!
>
>
> What are _your_ plans with regard to the material offered by W3C/Carmelo?
>
> How are tests conducted? Is there a check list according to which one
> could
> record/submit test results systematically?
>
> Do you think, the access of the database by FOP users (and not
> necessarily
> developers) can be enhanced in order to permit easier spotting of single
> test pieces relevant to a user's specific problem?
>
> These questions are what comes to my mind after heaving visited the site.
>
> Matthias
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carmelo Montanez [mailto:carmelo@nist.gov]
> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 8:43 PM
> To: fop-dev@xml.apache.org; bdelacretaz@codeconsult.ch; Matthias Fischer
> Subject: Re: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
>
>
> Hi all:
>
> Regarding the FO test suite. We at NIST in conjunction with the W3C
> Developed
> a test suite for FO. The site is:
>
> www.w3.org/Style/XSL/TestSuite/
>
> We are also working on expanding that work to include ALL of the basic
> aspects of the language. We expect to have close to 5000 tests by
> next march. Any contributions, ideas, etc. will be
> appreciated.
>
> Thanks
> Carmelo Montanez
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
Posted by Matthias Fischer <m....@abc-media.de>.
Thank you, Bertrand.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bertrand Delacretaz [mailto:bdelacretaz@codeconsult.ch]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:49 AM
To: Matthias Fischer; fop-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
[...]
In the meantime, I'd encourage users that find a bug or problem to send to
this list the smallest possible XSL-FO document that demonstrates the
problem. We could start collecting these in the hope of setting up a
user-friendly demo/test suite when someone finds time to do it.
- Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
Posted by Matthias Fischer <m....@abc-media.de>.
I'd prefer a more systematic approach: let's wait until the e-mail address
exists. I fear a prefix, as you proposed, is not user-friendly enough.
Before starting, we should also devise the "smallest possible document" into
which users could then insert their functionning examples. This would make
sure that everybody builds upon the same basis. It would make the samples
more easily comparable.
Matthias
-----Original Message-----
From: Bertrand Delacretaz [mailto:bdelacretaz@codeconsult.ch]
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:20 AM
To: Matthias Fischer; fop-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
ok, right now we don't have an alternative address available.
I suggest that you post your code to the list, inline (not as an attachment)
with [TESTDOC] in the subject line (I hope I'm not breaking an existing
convention here).
We can then find it easily in the mailing list archives.
- Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>.
On Tuesday 18 December 2001 09:59, Matthias Fischer wrote:
> Right now, I have a pice of code I would contribute. It would be useful, if
> there were an alternative e-mail address to that of the list, to collect
> the submitted code segments.
ok, right now we don't have an alternative address available.
I suggest that you post your code to the list, inline (not as an attachment)
with [TESTDOC] in the subject line (I hope I'm not breaking an existing
convention here).
We can then find it easily in the mailing list archives.
- Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
Posted by Matthias Fischer <m....@abc-media.de>.
Right now, I have a pice of code I would contribute. It would be useful, if
there were an alternative e-mail address to that of the list, to collect the
submitted code segments. Users could put this docu adress on CC, and you
could filter the stuff to heap it up somewhere until it gets used.
Matthias Fischer
-----Original Message-----
From: Bertrand Delacretaz [mailto:bdelacretaz@codeconsult.ch]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:49 AM
To: Matthias Fischer; fop-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
[...]
In the meantime, I'd encourage users that find a bug or problem to send to
this list the smallest possible XSL-FO document that demonstrates the
problem. We could start collecting these in the hope of setting up a
user-friendly demo/test suite when someone finds time to do it.
- Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>.
On Monday 17 December 2001 09:07, Matthias Fischer wrote:
> What are _your_ plans with regard to the material offered by W3C/Carmelo?
As mentioned by Keiron (see http://xml.apache.org/fop/testing.html), the
current FOP tests are based on automatically comparing the ouput
of two FOP revisions.
This is needed to make sure new releases don't break existing features, but
IMHO doesn't make it easy for end users to find out exactly how FOP
interprets specific features.
Again, I think what would help end-users a lot (and also have good tutorial
value) would be small self-describing XSL-FO documents where one can check
the results by reading the PDF, along with an "official" list of which
samples work and which don't.
Nice and well, but I don't think anyone on the FOP team currently has time to
fully set this up (but I'd be happy to be proven wrong!).
There are quite a lot of FOP samples already
(http://xml.apache.org/fop/examples.html), some more useful than others, so
maybe it's just a case of sorting through the samples, classifying them and
making them easily accessible, ideally using a live Internet-accessible FOP
setup.
In the meantime, I'd encourage users that find a bug or problem to send to
this list the smallest possible XSL-FO document that demonstrates the
problem. We could start collecting these in the hope of setting up a
user-friendly demo/test suite when someone finds time to do it.
- Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
Posted by Matthias Fischer <m....@abc-media.de>.
Great!
What are _your_ plans with regard to the material offered by W3C/Carmelo?
How are tests conducted? Is there a check list according to which one could
record/submit test results systematically?
Do you think, the access of the database by FOP users (and not necessarily
developers) can be enhanced in order to permit easier spotting of single
test pieces relevant to a user's specific problem?
These questions are what comes to my mind after heaving visited the site.
Matthias
-----Original Message-----
From: Carmelo Montanez [mailto:carmelo@nist.gov]
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 8:43 PM
To: fop-dev@xml.apache.org; bdelacretaz@codeconsult.ch; Matthias Fischer
Subject: Re: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
Hi all:
Regarding the FO test suite. We at NIST in conjunction with the W3C
Developed
a test suite for FO. The site is:
www.w3.org/Style/XSL/TestSuite/
We are also working on expanding that work to include ALL of the basic
aspects of the language. We expect to have close to 5000 tests by
next march. Any contributions, ideas, etc. will be
appreciated.
Thanks
Carmelo Montanez
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
Posted by Carmelo Montanez <ca...@nist.gov>.
Hi all:
Regarding the FO test suite. We at NIST in conjunction with the W3C
Developed
a test suite for FO. The site is:
www.w3.org/Style/XSL/TestSuite/
We are also working on expanding that work to include ALL of the basic
aspects of the language. We expect to have close to 5000 tests by
next march. Any contributions, ideas, etc. will be
appreciated.
Thanks
Carmelo Montanez
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>.
On Friday 14 December 2001 10:05, Matthias Fischer wrote:
> However, you won't escape "big maintenance" so easily:
Right - maintaining such a test suite is not light work.
The advantage over pure documentation, however, is that both users and
developers directly benefit from having strong test documents.
So I think it would be easier to get the FOP community to work on building
such a test suite (or organize/document existing tests) than finding someone
to write and maintain documentation.
--
-- Bertrand Delacrétaz, www.codeconsult.ch
-- web technologies consultant - OO, Java, XML, C++
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: fop-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
Posted by Matthias Fischer <m....@abc-media.de>.
Not all too bad, I think - if I have understood you right.
One of the unbcertainties in most of the problematic stages of our work was
that we didn't know whether _we_ had commited an error, FOP didn't implement
some FO feature, or none of the examples we relied on was correct. A
database where to look for working examples would be of great help in these
cases.
However, you won't escape "big maintenance" so easily: Would you allow
everybody to send his/her examples uncontrolled, i.e. not really knowing
whether the stuff works or not (read: under certain circumstances works,
under others not)? Would you index the examples for easier
navigation/searching? How would outdated examples be deleted in front of
innovations of the W3C spec, or simply new programming insights by someone
contributing to the database? Santa Clause would need some helpers, he
certainly can't do it all by himself ;-)
Matthias
-----Original Message-----
From: Bertrand Delacretaz [mailto:bdelacretaz@codeconsult.ch]
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 8:22 AM
To: fop-dev@xml.apache.org
Subject: Re: Basic aspects (big fat list vs. live test documents)
On Thursday 13 December 2001 15:35, Matthias Fischer wrote:
> . . .
> My whish to Santa Clause this year: A big fat list containing all major
> graphic formats and the FO/FOP-related aspects that concern them.
> . . .
I'm skeptical: to me "big fat list" means "big maintenance work" and usually
"out-of-sync list".
I'd rather have many small, focused, self-documented, numbered XSL-FO
example
files that show what works and what doesn't in FOP (note that I haven't
looked at our test files for a while - maybe it's there already?).
Maybe a live FOP system where users can post a ZIP containing XSL:FO +
graphics files and get back the PDF?
(got to tell Santa Claus about this one ;-)
Such examples could be donated by users after they find that a particular
feature works or not, with a standard mail header ([TESTDOC] ?) that would
help committers sort out these files.
Any thoughts?
--
-- Bertrand Delacrétaz, www.codeconsult.ch
-- web technologies consultant - OO, Java, XML, C++
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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