OK, I did this backwards... Does not change my vote, but I just took a look
at the jfor site. I saw a couple of phrases that concerned me a bit. These
are:
"jfor uses a simple mapping from XSL-FO to RTF without any layout
computations, which means that the conversion is much faster than with FOP,
for example (because jfor has much less to do - there's no magic here)"
and
"jfor attempts to preserve the structure of the document (a table is a
table, a list is a list, etc.), which can cause some loss of presentation
information (distances between elements, etc.)"
My concerns are that if jfor excels at speed at the expense of presentation.
1. Are jfor users going to be happy with jfor integrated with FOP
which seems to favor presentation over speed?
2. Would FOP users be happy with the RTF generated if it loses
presentation information?
Of course hopefully when they are merged the whole will be greater than the
sum of the parts. I do not know though. Assuming that the FOP architecture
does not change significantly - my experience with the renderers is that
they account for something like maybe 5 - 10 percent of the processing time
(maybe less, don't have the numbers in front of me right now).
Still I think that it is a good idea (especially for FOP users). Inexact
presentation should not necessarily invalidate a renderer - after all - I am
to blame for the TXTRenderer (talk about loss of presentation information).
Just thought that I would mention it.
Art
-----Original Message-----
From: Art Welch
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 4:44 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [vote] Merging JFor with FOP
Sounds like a good idea to me. The more renderers the better.
+1
Art
-----Original Message-----
From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 8:58 AM
To: FOP
Cc: Bertrand Delacretaz
Subject: [vote] Merging JFor with FOP
Hi people,
recently, some code was donated to the Apache Cocoon project in order to
connect it with JFor (www.jfor.org) which is a FO->RTF processor.
It appeared evident to me (and to others, as I discovered later) that
jfor and FOP are doing different things but could be an advantage for
both jfor developers, jfor users, FOP users and FO visibility in general
to join forces.
...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
