Re: FOP vs RenderX
It sounds as if you are more up-to-date on the keep-with-next status than I am, you may very well be right. I will check that out and repost. Mark - Original Message - From: "Matt Savino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 9:01 AM Subject: Re: FOP vs RenderX > I thought keep-together-with-next worked at the row level on .20.3. (W/o > going into an endless loop like .20.2 did if the selected group of rows > happened to span more than a page.) What is the final word on this? > > -Matt > > > Patrick Andries wrote: > > > > To be frank, although I have the same experience as Matt as far as speed > > (or lack thereof) of XEP is concerned, XEP is pleasant to work with > > (more syntax checking) and does support many more features (among which > > the absolutely essential keep-with-next for any professional looking > > document). > > > > I hear often that this may not be available soon in FOP, what does this > > mean a month, two months ? > > > > Patrick > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FOP vs RenderX
I thought keep-together-with-next worked at the row level on .20.3. (W/o going into an endless loop like .20.2 did if the selected group of rows happened to span more than a page.) What is the final word on this? -Matt Patrick Andries wrote: > > To be frank, although I have the same experience as Matt as far as speed > (or lack thereof) of XEP is concerned, XEP is pleasant to work with > (more syntax checking) and does support many more features (among which > the absolutely essential keep-with-next for any professional looking > document). > > I hear often that this may not be available soon in FOP, what does this > mean a month, two months ? > > Patrick > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FOP vs RenderX
Patrick, I wish that FOP also had the keep-with-next feature working, luckily, I don't think for this particular application it's going to be as crucial, we are only doing 1-up product sheets. I have been working with FOP for about a year, maybe a year and a half, and I am just starting to understand the basics of FOP (I think!), but only becuase there are so many applications and so much it can do. So, I think I am hearing that speed is an issue HUGE. FOP is much faster. What about functionality? Mark - Original Message - From: "Patrick Andries" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 12:52 AM Subject: Re: FOP vs RenderX > To be frank, although I have the same experience as Matt as far as speed > (or lack thereof) of XEP is concerned, XEP is pleasant to work with > (more syntax checking) and does support many more features (among which > the absolutely essential keep-with-next for any professional looking > document). > > I hear often that this may not be available soon in FOP, what does this > mean a month, two months ? > > Patrick > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FOP vs RenderX
To be frank, although I have the same experience as Matt as far as speed (or lack thereof) of XEP is concerned, XEP is pleasant to work with (more syntax checking) and does support many more features (among which the absolutely essential keep-with-next for any professional looking document). I hear often that this may not be available soon in FOP, what does this mean a month, two months ? Patrick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FOP vs RenderX
Search my threads a few months back. In my case XEP was 10 times slower than FOP. The RenderX guys looked at and said there was something weird about my tables. By most accounts RenderX and FOP should be about the same speed. I told them (RenderX) that if they could figure it out and XEP proved not to run out of memory the way FOP does we might still be interested in purchasing a number of licenses. They CEO of the company called me and tried to help, but I got the impression whey were all too busy to breathe--selling $5000/CPU licenses for a product that's inferior to something free. Arghh. -Matt > Mark Bitz wrote: > > I was wondering if anybody had done any comparisons of FOP vs XEP > (RenderX's engine). Or if anybody knows where I can find any such > comparisons. RenderX took their comparison down off of their web site > and I am trying to fend off a potential XEP solution in my company. I > would rather use FOP and a comparison may be very helpful. > > Mark > > > > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FOP vs RenderX
I was wondering if anybody had done any comparisons of FOP vs XEP (RenderX's engine). Or if anybody knows where I can find any such comparisons. RenderX took their comparison down off of their web site and I am trying to fend off a potential XEP solution in my company. I would rather use FOP and a comparison may be very helpful. Mark
