Hi! Wasnt sure if this should go to this list of the apps list...so I chose hope thats allright!
Ok here goes I have recently started using docbook to document our companys products. I have produced a large amount of documentation and taken advantage of the "set" feature to collect several books concerned with a project together. I have applied norms XSLT FO transform (version 1.50.0) to produce an output xml file in FO format (using several processors including xsltproc and saxon). I then attempted to use FOP to create pdf output from this FO file, this resulted in FOP (version 0.20.3) giving an error: [ERROR]: The id "toc...book1_chapter_2" already exists in this document I examine the FO file and sure enough the id is indeed duplicated... I have produced a minimal xml source file and the fo output generated by xsltproc(note saxons output is very similar) The issue appears to be that the set TOC duplicates the book TOC id when a chapter of the book has sections. commands issued are: xsltproc nwalsh/fo/docbook.xsl test.xml >test.fo fop -q -fo test.fo -pdf test.pdf so nothing fancy at all the example test.xml is <?xml version="1.0" standalone="no"?> <!DOCTYPE set PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4.1.2//EN" "file:///usr/share/sgml/docbook/dtd/xml/4.1.2/docbookx.dtd" [ ]> <set id="set_id"> <book id="book1_id"> <title>book 1</title> <chapter id="book1_chapter_1"> <title>chapter 1</title> <para>book 1 chapter 1 para 1</para> </chapter> <chapter id="book1_chapter_2"> <title>chapter 2</title> <para>book 1 chapter 2 para 1</para> <section> <title>book 1 chapter 2 para 1 section 1</title> <para>book 1 chapter 2 para 1 section 1 para 1</para> </section> </chapter> </book> </set> the FO output is ... err not attached as its big and can be replicated readily I have tried passivetex which doesnt produce an error but doenst handle the tables in my real documentation anywhere near as well as FOP does. What am i doing wrong and how do i fix this? Note in the real docs i have a customisation xsl sheet but i dont seem to be able to correct this, and the example does present the minimum case which i dont seem to be able to fix (other than changing the ids) -- Regards Vincent http://www.kyllikki.org/