FOP 0.10.0 Released

Date:    Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:04:54 +0800
From:    James Tauber <jtauber@jtauber.com>
To:      XSL-List@mulberrytech.com
Subject: FOP 0.10.0 released

[See:]

http://www.jtauber.com/fop/

This version is much faster. A 100-page test document that used to take 50 seconds in 0.9.x now takes 15 seconds. Some important bugs have been fixed. This version is approaching actually being usable for real work.

Very simple support for a tiny bit of SVG. break-before and break-after implemented. Justification bug fixed. text-indent implemented. font-weight as number implemented. line-height as number implemented. Java source for properties now generated from XML document via XSLT. Added support for emdash, copyright, non-breaking-space and section Detects inline-sequence directly under flow. Display rules can go in blocks. List item labels now obey start-indent. Page breaks mid-list now (appear to) work.

James

[...]

Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:04:44 +0800
From: James Tauber <jtauber@jtauber.com>
To: XSL-List@mulberrytech.com
Subject: Preliminary XSL stylesheet for XHTML available

I forgot to mention that along with the release of FOP 0.10.0, I've released a preliminary version of an XSL stylesheet for XHTML. It only covers those things FOP supports, but it might be useful either as a sample XSL stylesheet (that uses the FO vocabulary) or for printing HTML documents.

This latter use will be a lot more viable once I implement keeps and tables in FOP, mind you.

Comments are welcome and strongly encouraged.

[...]

Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:24:00 +0800
From: James Tauber <jtauber@jtauber.com>
To: XML-Dev Mailing list <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>
Subject: code generation from XML datatype definitions: anyone interested?

One of the things that's new in FOP 0.10.0 is that the Java source code for the classes for each XSL property is generated by applying an XSLT transform to an XML representation of the properties.

This XML representation of the properties is a bit like the datatype definitions being worked on in the XML Schema WG. This got be thinking about turning what I've done into a more general solution.

If anyone is interested in working with me on further developing this, please let me know.

What I'm interested in developing is a tool or tools that take an augmented[*] datatype definition and produces a Java class or classes that are capable of representing the datatypes and parse string representations.

[*] I say augmented because I would like to include, in the definition, code for how different lexical representations of a value get translated into a "canonical" datatype (for example, different units).

I would like XSL properties to drive the requirements but would like to make it a general solution. Note that part of what the work I've begun covers is defaulting, inheritence and the computation of properties from other properties. I would like to include all this in the scope of this project.

Any takers? I'm going to do it for FOP anyway, but it would be great if people could work with me to make it a generic solution.

James

[...]

Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 11:04:56 +0800
From: James Tauber <jtauber@jtauber.com>
To: XML-Dev Mailing list <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: should FOP require JDK1.2.x?

Thank you to everyone so far who has contributed suggestions both on the list and directly to me. I hope people don't mind this discussion being on the list. I figure it is of some relevance to a number of XML developers (where *it* is the whole question of 1.2 vs 1.1, *not* the specific question of what Fop should do :-)

> We could make a more concrete determination if James outlined the features > he's looking to use in 1.2.

None in particular.

I have a couple of ideas though:

1. The collections framework. Although I could use that with 1.1 as a couple of people have pointed out. My only concerns with that are:

(a) for convenience for those that don't already have collections with 1.1 it would be better for me to include it with Fop
(b) I might not be allowed to include it with Fop (I haven't checked the licence)
(c) if I do bundle it, I would have to include a distribution of Fop without it for those people that already have it

2. Other libraries that require 1.2. For example, some of the stuff that I'd like to do might be nice to try out with MDSAX2 but that requires 1.2

3. Java 2D / Printing. I'd like Fop to be able to print and display on screen directly without PDF as well as with and Java 2D / Printing would be the obvious way to do this. The modular nature of Fop would enable me to perhaps distribute a separate 1.2 application to do this and leave the core as 1.1

Incidently, from 0.10.0 I've been compiling with a 1.2.2 compiler but only using 1.1 libraries. Does anyone know if this will still cause problems for people using 1.1. (ie should I go back to using a 1.1 compiler).

Thanks

James

James Tauber / jtauber@jtauber.com / www.jtauber.com
Maintainer of : www.xmlinfo.com,  www.xmlsoftware.com and www.schema.net
<pipe>Ceci n'est pas une pipe</pipe>

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1

Prepared by Robin Cover for the The SGML/XML Web Page archive.

SEARCH Advanced Search ABOUT Site Map CP RSS Channel Contact Us Sponsoring CP About Our Sponsors NEWS Cover Stories Articles & Papers Press Releases CORE STANDARDS XML SGML Schemas XSL/XSLT/XPath XLink XML Query CSS SVG TECHNOLOGY REPORTS XML Applications General Apps Government Apps Academic Apps EVENTS LIBRARY Introductions FAQs Bibliography Technology and Society Semantics Tech Topics Software Related Standards Historic	FOP 0.10.0 Released Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:04:54 +0800 From: James Tauber <jtauber@jtauber.com> To: XSL-List@mulberrytech.com Subject: FOP 0.10.0 released [See:] http://www.jtauber.com/fop/ This version is much faster. A 100-page test document that used to take 50 seconds in 0.9.x now takes 15 seconds. Some important bugs have been fixed. This version is approaching actually being usable for real work. Very simple support for a tiny bit of SVG. break-before and break-after implemented. Justification bug fixed. text-indent implemented. font-weight as number implemented. line-height as number implemented. Java source for properties now generated from XML document via XSLT. Added support for emdash, copyright, non-breaking-space and section Detects inline-sequence directly under flow. Display rules can go in blocks. List item labels now obey start-indent. Page breaks mid-list now (appear to) work. James [...] Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:04:44 +0800 From: James Tauber <jtauber@jtauber.com> To: XSL-List@mulberrytech.com Subject: Preliminary XSL stylesheet for XHTML available I forgot to mention that along with the release of FOP 0.10.0, I've released a preliminary version of an XSL stylesheet for XHTML. It only covers those things FOP supports, but it might be useful either as a sample XSL stylesheet (that uses the FO vocabulary) or for printing HTML documents. This latter use will be a lot more viable once I implement keeps and tables in FOP, mind you. Comments are welcome and strongly encouraged. [...] Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 14:24:00 +0800 From: James Tauber <jtauber@jtauber.com> To: XML-Dev Mailing list <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk> Subject: code generation from XML datatype definitions: anyone interested? One of the things that's new in FOP 0.10.0 is that the Java source code for the classes for each XSL property is generated by applying an XSLT transform to an XML representation of the properties. This XML representation of the properties is a bit like the datatype definitions being worked on in the XML Schema WG. This got be thinking about turning what I've done into a more general solution. If anyone is interested in working with me on further developing this, please let me know. What I'm interested in developing is a tool or tools that take an augmented[] datatype definition and produces a Java class or classes that are capable of representing the datatypes and parse string representations. [] I say augmented because I would like to include, in the definition, code for how different lexical representations of a value get translated into a "canonical" datatype (for example, different units). I would like XSL properties to drive the requirements but would like to make it a general solution. Note that part of what the work I've begun covers is defaulting, inheritence and the computation of properties from other properties. I would like to include all this in the scope of this project. Any takers? I'm going to do it for FOP anyway, but it would be great if people could work with me to make it a generic solution. James [...] Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 11:04:56 +0800 From: James Tauber <jtauber@jtauber.com> To: XML-Dev Mailing list <xml-dev@ic.ac.uk> Subject: Re: should FOP require JDK1.2.x? Thank you to everyone so far who has contributed suggestions both on the list and directly to me. I hope people don't mind this discussion being on the list. I figure it is of some relevance to a number of XML developers (where it is the whole question of 1.2 vs 1.1, not the specific question of what Fop should do :-) > We could make a more concrete determination if James outlined the features > he's looking to use in 1.2. None in particular. I have a couple of ideas though: 1. The collections framework. Although I could use that with 1.1 as a couple of people have pointed out. My only concerns with that are: (a) for convenience for those that don't already have collections with 1.1 it would be better for me to include it with Fop (b) I might not be allowed to include it with Fop (I haven't checked the licence) (c) if I do bundle it, I would have to include a distribution of Fop without it for those people that already have it 2. Other libraries that require 1.2. For example, some of the stuff that I'd like to do might be nice to try out with MDSAX2 but that requires 1.2 3. Java 2D / Printing. I'd like Fop to be able to print and display on screen directly without PDF as well as with and Java 2D / Printing would be the obvious way to do this. The modular nature of Fop would enable me to perhaps distribute a separate 1.2 application to do this and leave the core as 1.1 Incidently, from 0.10.0 I've been compiling with a 1.2.2 compiler but only using 1.1 libraries. Does anyone know if this will still cause problems for people using 1.1. (ie should I go back to using a 1.1 compiler). Thanks James James Tauber / jtauber@jtauber.com / www.jtauber.com Maintainer of : www.xmlinfo.com, www.xmlsoftware.com and www.schema.net <pipe>Ceci n'est pas une pipe</pipe> xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 Prepared by Robin Cover for the The SGML/XML Web Page archive.