On Fri, 2003-03-21 at 17:42, Schuetz, David wrote: > So PassiveTeX does FO -> PDF transforms, directly? (though an invisible > LaTeX step, I gather).
no intermediate step. the macros parse the XML directly > Are there any good comparisons of the two? (I'm > using FOP 'cause it's what I used before, and RenderX wasn't free, but if I > could avoid Java I'd be a happy camper...) PassiveTeX's problem is that it does not implement all the XSL FO attributes; after a certain point, it becomes very very hard. Also, the tables are not brilliant. What it does, it does well. Its not as good as RenderX or Antenna House, but it may be comparable with FOP. Sun's xmlroff will be better, when its feature coverage becomes greater, as its in C and so more amenable to embedding in AxKit properly (I am the PassiveTeX author, if it isn't obvious) -- Sebastian Rahtz OUCS Information Manager 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
