Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
Andreas L Delmelle wrote: > > > Hi all > > > As some of you may already know, the fop-dev team is currently in the > process of preparing a new release. With this post, we would like to > gather some ideas on what the user community would like to see > incorporated in FOP 0.94. > As always, we value your input and feedback. > > > Thanks > > Andreas > > (*) http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/fop/branches/fop-0_94/ > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > If I'm still on time to contribute, I'd like to see bug #40798 fixed. (page-position="last" doesn't work for 1 page document) http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40798 Maybe, supporting page-position='only' should not be a great deal (?), and could strongly increase support for administrative 1- or 2-page documents (invoices etc.) Just my 2 cents. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Quick-survey%3A-upcoming-release-of-FOP-0.94-tf4085495.html#a12184937 Sent from the FOP - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
This ought to be pretty fast to implement (maybe?): 2up and 4up. That is, generating PDF files that conceptually use the page size of the XSL-FO document, but render their contents to half or a quarter of an actual page (of a size specified in the command-line). Andreas L Delmelle wrote: > > > Hi all > > > As some of you may already know, the fop-dev team is currently in the > process of preparing a new release. With this post, we would like to > gather some ideas on what the user community would like to see > incorporated in FOP 0.94. > > Note that the release will already contain some cool new features > compared to 0.93, like support for border-collapse="collapse", auto- > detection and -registration of available custom fonts and > improvements in handling internal destinations... > > What we are currently looking for are not large improvements (like > table-layout="auto", which we are well aware is still missing), but > more the elimination of small annoyances, little things that could > mean a great deal to you. > > So, shoot away, and we'll see what we can do. No suggestion will be > dismissed without consideration. Even if we do not implement the > suggestion immediately, if it's interesting enough, we will > definitely keep it in mind as a possible priority for the next release. > > We would also like this to be an opportunity for users who are in a > position where they are able to check out and build the 0.94 release > branch that has been created (*), to see if we have overlooked > anything in our testsuites. If any bugs or unexpected results turn up > in your real-time scenarios, we would of course appreciate it very > much if these are uncovered before the actual release. > > > As always, we value your input and feedback. > > > Thanks > > Andreas > > (*) http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/fop/branches/fop-0_94/ > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Quick-survey%3A-upcoming-release-of-FOP-0.94-tf4085495.html#a12062091 Sent from the FOP - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
To redevelop something that worked before to look exactly the same because HP dropped their own format? No, no budget yet & no sense of futility either. :) I've set this to do the font bitmapping, not sure that it's working as the font sizes aren't right, but they don't overlap so much: conf/fop.xconf: ... bitmap It looks the same as the PDF version on other printers though, so I can't reproduce it personally ... I'll try to get an example. Regards, Roland Jeremias Maerki wrote: Quite a bit of work, what you suggest here. PCL 6 (aka PCL XL) is a completely different printer language compared to PCL 5. We'd have to develop a completely new renderer. Do you have a budget for this? ;-) What does that mean: "better, but still not adequate"? Does it print correctly on those printers or not? What's the problem? On 31.07.2007 08:48:08 Roland Neilands wrote: I suggest PCL6 support. A late response I know, but this just came up recently & I can't work around it. PCL 5 support is being dropped from some new printers it seems: http://h2.www2.hp.com/bc/docs/support/SupportManual/c00878487/c00878487.pdf This has happened a couple of times recently, & the printers don't have usable postscript support, and bitmapping the fonts in 0.93 sadly didn't resolve the issue (better, but still not adequate). It remains for me to say "buy another printer". I wonder how long that answer will fly? Regards, Roland Andreas L Delmelle wrote: Hi all As some of you may already know, the fop-dev team is currently in the process of preparing a new release. With this post, we would like to gather some ideas on what the user community would like to see incorporated in FOP 0.94. Note that the release will already contain some cool new features compared to 0.93, like support for border-collapse="collapse", auto-detection and -registration of available custom fonts and improvements in handling internal destinations... What we are currently looking for are not large improvements (like table-layout="auto", which we are well aware is still missing), but more the elimination of small annoyances, little things that could mean a great deal to you. So, shoot away, and we'll see what we can do. No suggestion will be dismissed without consideration. Even if we do not implement the suggestion immediately, if it's interesting enough, we will definitely keep it in mind as a possible priority for the next release. We would also like this to be an opportunity for users who are in a position where they are able to check out and build the 0.94 release branch that has been created (*), to see if we have overlooked anything in our testsuites. If any bugs or unexpected results turn up in your real-time scenarios, we would of course appreciate it very much if these are uncovered before the actual release. As always, we value your input and feedback. Thanks Andreas (*) http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/fop/branches/fop-0_94/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
Quite a bit of work, what you suggest here. PCL 6 (aka PCL XL) is a completely different printer language compared to PCL 5. We'd have to develop a completely new renderer. Do you have a budget for this? ;-) What does that mean: "better, but still not adequate"? Does it print correctly on those printers or not? What's the problem? On 31.07.2007 08:48:08 Roland Neilands wrote: > I suggest PCL6 support. > > A late response I know, but this just came up recently & I can't work > around it. > PCL 5 support is being dropped from some new printers it seems: > http://h2.www2.hp.com/bc/docs/support/SupportManual/c00878487/c00878487.pdf > > This has happened a couple of times recently, & the printers don't have > usable postscript support, and bitmapping the fonts in 0.93 sadly didn't > resolve the issue (better, but still not adequate). > It remains for me to say "buy another printer". I wonder how long that > answer will fly? > > Regards, > Roland > > > Andreas L Delmelle wrote: > > > > Hi all > > > > > > As some of you may already know, the fop-dev team is currently in the > > process of preparing a new release. With this post, we would like to > > gather some ideas on what the user community would like to see > > incorporated in FOP 0.94. > > > > Note that the release will already contain some cool new features > > compared to 0.93, like support for border-collapse="collapse", > > auto-detection and -registration of available custom fonts and > > improvements in handling internal destinations... > > > > What we are currently looking for are not large improvements (like > > table-layout="auto", which we are well aware is still missing), but > > more the elimination of small annoyances, little things that could > > mean a great deal to you. > > > > So, shoot away, and we'll see what we can do. No suggestion will be > > dismissed without consideration. Even if we do not implement the > > suggestion immediately, if it's interesting enough, we will definitely > > keep it in mind as a possible priority for the next release. > > > > We would also like this to be an opportunity for users who are in a > > position where they are able to check out and build the 0.94 release > > branch that has been created (*), to see if we have overlooked > > anything in our testsuites. If any bugs or unexpected results turn up > > in your real-time scenarios, we would of course appreciate it very > > much if these are uncovered before the actual release. > > > > > > As always, we value your input and feedback. > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Andreas > > > > (*) http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/fop/branches/fop-0_94/ > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
I suggest PCL6 support. A late response I know, but this just came up recently & I can't work around it. PCL 5 support is being dropped from some new printers it seems: http://h2.www2.hp.com/bc/docs/support/SupportManual/c00878487/c00878487.pdf This has happened a couple of times recently, & the printers don't have usable postscript support, and bitmapping the fonts in 0.93 sadly didn't resolve the issue (better, but still not adequate). It remains for me to say "buy another printer". I wonder how long that answer will fly? Regards, Roland Andreas L Delmelle wrote: Hi all As some of you may already know, the fop-dev team is currently in the process of preparing a new release. With this post, we would like to gather some ideas on what the user community would like to see incorporated in FOP 0.94. Note that the release will already contain some cool new features compared to 0.93, like support for border-collapse="collapse", auto-detection and -registration of available custom fonts and improvements in handling internal destinations... What we are currently looking for are not large improvements (like table-layout="auto", which we are well aware is still missing), but more the elimination of small annoyances, little things that could mean a great deal to you. So, shoot away, and we'll see what we can do. No suggestion will be dismissed without consideration. Even if we do not implement the suggestion immediately, if it's interesting enough, we will definitely keep it in mind as a possible priority for the next release. We would also like this to be an opportunity for users who are in a position where they are able to check out and build the 0.94 release branch that has been created (*), to see if we have overlooked anything in our testsuites. If any bugs or unexpected results turn up in your real-time scenarios, we would of course appreciate it very much if these are uncovered before the actual release. As always, we value your input and feedback. Thanks Andreas (*) http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/fop/branches/fop-0_94/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
The default locations look good. But I know there are some differences between Windows TrueType fonts and Macintosh TrueType fonts. They use different tables for certain things. I would be nice if FOP could be made to work with Macintosh TrueType fonts. -- Loran Kary On Jul 19, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Andreas L Delmelle wrote: On Jul 19, 2007, at 19:38, Loran Kary wrote: How does this work in a Macintosh OS X environment? Quite good, apart from the fact that certain fonts apparently are unsuitable to be used by FOP. They are all nicely detected, but you get errors about missing Unicode CMAPs or invalid ascender/ descender pairs... Haven't really looked closer into the causes of those, but the auto-detection routine works fine in any case. here you can find the default locations that are searched for fonts: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/xmlgraphics/fop/trunk/src/java/org/ apache/fop/fonts/autodetect/MacFontDirFinder.java?view=markup Cheers Andreas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
On Jul 19, 2007, at 19:38, Loran Kary wrote: How does this work in a Macintosh OS X environment? Quite good, apart from the fact that certain fonts apparently are unsuitable to be used by FOP. They are all nicely detected, but you get errors about missing Unicode CMAPs or invalid ascender/descender pairs... Haven't really looked closer into the causes of those, but the auto-detection routine works fine in any case. here you can find the default locations that are searched for fonts: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/xmlgraphics/fop/trunk/src/java/org/ apache/fop/fonts/autodetect/MacFontDirFinder.java?view=markup Cheers Andreas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
How does this work in a Macintosh OS X environment? On Jul 18, 2007, at 5:53 AM, Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 17.07.2007 14:39:29 Kamal wrote: Auto detection and auto registration of custom fonts sounds good. Can we have more info? Well, it's not perfect, yet, but the basic idea is that users should not need to worry about registering custom fonts. If the Arial TrueType font is present on the system where FOP runs, then the user should now be able to use that font in his FO documents without taking any additional steps (like generating metrics and registering triplets in the configuration file). How does this work in a Unix environment? Some known font locations are preconfigured in FOP. FOP goes looking for fonts in those directories. Additional locations can easily be configured in the user configuration. See http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/xmlgraphics/fop/trunk/src/java/org/ apache/fop/fonts/autodetect/UnixFontDirFinder.java?view=markup Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
Hi Kamal, FYI, the Unix autodetect feature looks in the following locations for fonts it can use :- java user.home + "/.fonts", "/usr/local/fonts", "/usr/share/fonts", "/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts" As Jeremias says, you can configure FOP to look in a particular (see http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/trunk/fonts.html). Adrian. Jeremias Maerki wrote: On 17.07.2007 14:39:29 Kamal wrote: Auto detection and auto registration of custom fonts sounds good. Can we have more info? Well, it's not perfect, yet, but the basic idea is that users should not need to worry about registering custom fonts. If the Arial TrueType font is present on the system where FOP runs, then the user should now be able to use that font in his FO documents without taking any additional steps (like generating metrics and registering triplets in the configuration file). How does this work in a Unix environment? Some known font locations are preconfigured in FOP. FOP goes looking for fonts in those directories. Additional locations can easily be configured in the user configuration. See http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/xmlgraphics/fop/trunk/src/java/org/apache/fop/fonts/autodetect/UnixFontDirFinder.java?view=markup Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
On 17.07.2007 14:39:29 Kamal wrote: > >> Auto detection and auto registration of custom fonts sounds good. > >> Can we have more info? > > > > > > Well, it's not perfect, yet, but the basic idea is that users should > > not need to worry about registering custom fonts. If the Arial > > TrueType font is present on the system where FOP runs, then the user > > should now be able to use that font in his FO documents without > > taking any additional steps (like generating metrics and registering > > triplets in the configuration file). > > How does this work in a Unix environment? Some known font locations are preconfigured in FOP. FOP goes looking for fonts in those directories. Additional locations can easily be configured in the user configuration. See http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/xmlgraphics/fop/trunk/src/java/org/apache/fop/fonts/autodetect/UnixFontDirFinder.java?view=markup Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
I guess float support is also out of the question, but that is top of my wish lists. Unfortunately, yes. If I judge the status of the Temp_Floats code- branch correctly, it is not yet ready to be merged back into the trunk anytime soon... That said, the branch is there. The only thing lacking is heads and hands to work on it. Pity Working with tables and XSLT is painful. I don't know if it is a big or small change, but as I pointed out in previous posts, I think having no integer support for keep-together, keep-with-next, keep-with-previous is a major flaw as it makes it next to useless to me[1]. This would be a rather big project, IIC. Not necessarily difficult, but a lot of work. AFAICT, there have been no parties yet that have started to gather ideas. We'll see if we can at least start a Wiki about this, where you could follow the status and comment in on possible implementations. Also, it would be nice to see the table continuation labels extension return to FOP. I noticed indeed this recently popped up as a reason for some to still prefer using 0.20.5 over 0.93. This will have to addressed sooner rather than later. That would be nice. On the topic of extensions, I found the way borders work at the region level counter intuitive when combined with columns (ie, if you specify a border, it puts it around each column, not the region). It would be nice to have as an extension to FOP that made this work sensibly, eg, a set of region border attributes. Hope that makes sense. It does. On the other hand, I'm just now wondering whether your problem here cannot be solved by using fo:block-containers to hold the borders... Have you tried this? I will have a go. I assume you mean put the content that will be columnised into a block container and put the border around the block container? Auto detection and auto registration of custom fonts sounds good. Can we have more info? Well, it's not perfect, yet, but the basic idea is that users should not need to worry about registering custom fonts. If the Arial TrueType font is present on the system where FOP runs, then the user should now be able to use that font in his FO documents without taking any additional steps (like generating metrics and registering triplets in the configuration file). How does this work in a Unix environment? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
Hugues wrote: > > Hi Adrian, > > OK, I test again and I open new thread. > > Hugues Leonardi > > Adrian Cumiskey wrote: > > Hi Hugues, > > HLeonardi wrote: >>> - font autodetection : I have tested this feature but the results were >>> wrongs. When I have a little time, I will take a look at the doc and I >>> test again. > > It would be great if you could provide me some more information about > this please. I am pretty sure that the font autodetection will require > *some* tweaking and refinement - so user testing and feedback is really > helpful. What system do you use to run FOP? How were the results wrong? > > Cheers, > > Adrian. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Quick-survey%3A-upcoming-release-of-FOP-0.94-tf4085495.html#a11657056 Sent from the FOP - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
Hi, I wish that one day, fop will support the element fo:change-bar described in the http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xsl11-20061205/#fo_change-bar-begin xsl spec 1.1 . I know that this is impossible for the next release, but in the future it will be great that fop integrates this object. Thanks. :) -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Quick-survey%3A-upcoming-release-of-FOP-0.94-tf4085495.html#a11650712 Sent from the FOP - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
In FOP 0.93, page references are kept in ways that preserve the whole original pages objects. No problem with that except that this process is TOO memory intensive and exausts the heap memory if you have too many pages, segments and references. What i would like to see in a future FOP release would be a "minimalist" object that retains only the "references" after the page is created, allowing the "unload" of the whole page. When the "reference" is requested after it, the current page sequence would be queried, and if not found, the "minimalist" collection would be searched. If the reference isn't the the collection either, it would give a "reference not found" error as it gives today. That mechanism would allow for huge documents, with huge lists of references, to be created without compromising the heap memory, because only the current sequence would be kept in memory. Cheers, LF [EMAIL PROTECTED] escreveu: Are there perfomance enancements? I mean about the page sequence memory consuption issue that prevent to use FOP in a production env for reports bigger than 500 pages? best regards GM Hi all As some of you may already know, the fop-dev team is currently in the process of preparing a new release. With this post, we would like to gather some ideas on what the user community would like to see incorporated in FOP 0.94. Note that the release will already contain some cool new features compared to 0.93, like support for border-collapse="collapse", auto- detection and -registration of available custom fonts and improvements in handling internal destinations... What we are currently looking for are not large improvements (like table-layout="auto", which we are well aware is still missing), but more the elimination of small annoyances, little things that could mean a great deal to you. So, shoot away, and we'll see what we can do. No suggestion will be dismissed without consideration. Even if we do not implement the suggestion immediately, if it's interesting enough, we will definitely keep it in mind as a possible priority for the next release. We would also like this to be an opportunity for users who are in a position where they are able to check out and build the 0.94 release branch that has been created (*), to see if we have overlooked anything in our testsuites. If any bugs or unexpected results turn up in your real-time scenarios, we would of course appreciate it very much if these are uncovered before the actual release. As always, we value your input and feedback. Thanks Andreas (*) http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/fop/branches/fop-0_94/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
Hi Hugues, HLeonardi wrote: - font autodetection : I have tested this feature but the results were wrongs. When I have a little time, I will take a look at the doc and I test again. It would be great if you could provide me some more information about this please. I am pretty sure that the font autodetection will require *some* tweaking and refinement - so user testing and feedback is really helpful. What system do you use to run FOP? How were the results wrong? Cheers, Adrian. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
On Jul 16, 2007, at 15:33, Kamal wrote: Hi Kamal I guess float support is also out of the question, but that is top of my wish lists. Unfortunately, yes. If I judge the status of the Temp_Floats code- branch correctly, it is not yet ready to be merged back into the trunk anytime soon... That said, the branch is there. The only thing lacking is heads and hands to work on it. Working with tables and XSLT is painful. I don't know if it is a big or small change, but as I pointed out in previous posts, I think having no integer support for keep-together, keep-with-next, keep-with-previous is a major flaw as it makes it next to useless to me[1]. This would be a rather big project, IIC. Not necessarily difficult, but a lot of work. AFAICT, there have been no parties yet that have started to gather ideas. We'll see if we can at least start a Wiki about this, where you could follow the status and comment in on possible implementations. Also, it would be nice to see the table continuation labels extension return to FOP. I noticed indeed this recently popped up as a reason for some to still prefer using 0.20.5 over 0.93. This will have to addressed sooner rather than later. On the topic of extensions, I found the way borders work at the region level counter intuitive when combined with columns (ie, if you specify a border, it puts it around each column, not the region). It would be nice to have as an extension to FOP that made this work sensibly, eg, a set of region border attributes. Hope that makes sense. It does. On the other hand, I'm just now wondering whether your problem here cannot be solved by using fo:block-containers to hold the borders... Have you tried this? Auto detection and auto registration of custom fonts sounds good. Can we have more info? Well, it's not perfect, yet, but the basic idea is that users should not need to worry about registering custom fonts. If the Arial TrueType font is present on the system where FOP runs, then the user should now be able to use that font in his FO documents without taking any additional steps (like generating metrics and registering triplets in the configuration file). Cheers Andreas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
I guess float support is also out of the question, but that is top of my wish lists. Working with tables and XSLT is painful. I don't know if it is a big or small change, but as I pointed out in previous posts, I think having no integer support for keep-together, keep-with-next, keep-with-previous is a major flaw as it makes it next to useless to me[1]. Also, it would be nice to see the table continuation labels extension return to FOP. On the topic of extensions, I found the way borders work at the region level counter intuitive when combined with columns (ie, if you specify a border, it puts it around each column, not the region). It would be nice to have as an extension to FOP that made this work sensibly, eg, a set of region border attributes. Hope that makes sense. Auto detection and auto registration of custom fonts sounds good. Can we have more info? Kamal. [1] http://marc.info/?l=fop-user&m=118171831815966&w=2 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
Andreas L Delmelle schrieb: We would also like this to be an opportunity for users who are in a position where they are able to check out and build the 0.94 release branch that has been created (*), to see if we have overlooked anything in our testsuites. If any bugs or unexpected results turn up in your real-time scenarios, we would of course appreciate it very much if these are uncovered before the actual release. Hello, I tried my "st scripts" (http://www.thomas-zastrow.de/st/) with the 0.94 release branch, works perfect! Thank you!!! Tom -- http://www.thomas-zastrow.de German Forum - DTP under Linux: http://www.opendtp.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
Hugues Leonardi wrote: > > > So, shoot away, and we'll see what we can do. No suggestion will be > dismissed without consideration. Even if we do not implement the > suggestion immediately, if it's interesting enough, we will > definitely keep it in mind as a possible priority for the next release. > > About footnotes : > There was a little patch in the patch queue that adds footnotes from table > cell or list item. This patch do the job well. I know that is a great work > to implement the whole of this functionnality but if this patch could be > added, it would be nice. > > > We would also like this to be an opportunity for users who are in a > position where they are able to check out and build the 0.94 release > branch that has been created (*), to see if we have overlooked > anything in our testsuites. If any bugs or unexpected results turn up > in your real-time scenarios, we would of course appreciate it very > much if these are uncovered before the actual release. > > I will download and test the 0.94. But, I regulary download and build > fop-trunk. It works well. Here is a little feedback about pdf output: > - external-links between documents : OK with acrobat reader only > - exact positioning of bookmarks links : 0K > - improvements about tables : not tested yet > - font autodetection : I have tested this feature but the results were > wrongs. When I have a little time, I will take a look at the doc and I > test again. > other improvements : not tested > > Best regards > > Hugues Leonardi > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Quick-survey%3A-upcoming-release-of-FOP-0.94-tf4085495.html#a11621724 Sent from the FOP - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
On Jul 16, 2007, at 11:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Are there perfomance enancements? Yes, in comparison to 0.93, there should be /some/ performance enhancements in terms of memory usage, especially in the FO tree, but... I mean about the page sequence memory consuption issue that prevent to use FOP in a production env for reports bigger than 500 pages? ... this particular issue is still open. The root 'cause' for this limitation still exists in the 0.94 release, and has to do with FOP waiting for an endElement("page-sequence") event from the parser before entering the layout-phase. The enhancements that were introduced could slightly increase this limit, but only marginally AFAICT. As recently indicated in another thread, we welcome any suggestions in this area. The discussion is very much being kept alive. The more heads involved in it, the greater the chance those issues will ever get resolved. Some ideas on improvement have been discussed on fop-dev earlier this year, but it was clear then, that it will by no means be a straightforward task, let alone a one-man-job. Cheers Andreas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
Are there perfomance enancements? I mean about the page sequence memory consuption issue that prevent to use FOP in a production env for reports bigger than 500 pages? best regards GM > > Hi all > > > As some of you may already know, the fop-dev team is currently in the > process of preparing a new release. With this post, we would like to > gather some ideas on what the user community would like to see > incorporated in FOP 0.94. > > Note that the release will already contain some cool new features > compared to 0.93, like support for border-collapse="collapse", auto- > detection and -registration of available custom fonts and > improvements in handling internal destinations... > > What we are currently looking for are not large improvements (like > table-layout="auto", which we are well aware is still missing), but > more the elimination of small annoyances, little things that could > mean a great deal to you. > > So, shoot away, and we'll see what we can do. No suggestion will be > dismissed without consideration. Even if we do not implement the > suggestion immediately, if it's interesting enough, we will > definitely keep it in mind as a possible priority for the next release. > > We would also like this to be an opportunity for users who are in a > position where they are able to check out and build the 0.94 release > branch that has been created (*), to see if we have overlooked > anything in our testsuites. If any bugs or unexpected results turn up > in your real-time scenarios, we would of course appreciate it very > much if these are uncovered before the actual release. > > > As always, we value your input and feedback. > > > Thanks > > Andreas > > (*) http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/fop/branches/fop-0_94/ > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quick survey: upcoming release of FOP 0.94
Hi all As some of you may already know, the fop-dev team is currently in the process of preparing a new release. With this post, we would like to gather some ideas on what the user community would like to see incorporated in FOP 0.94. Note that the release will already contain some cool new features compared to 0.93, like support for border-collapse="collapse", auto- detection and -registration of available custom fonts and improvements in handling internal destinations... What we are currently looking for are not large improvements (like table-layout="auto", which we are well aware is still missing), but more the elimination of small annoyances, little things that could mean a great deal to you. So, shoot away, and we'll see what we can do. No suggestion will be dismissed without consideration. Even if we do not implement the suggestion immediately, if it's interesting enough, we will definitely keep it in mind as a possible priority for the next release. We would also like this to be an opportunity for users who are in a position where they are able to check out and build the 0.94 release branch that has been created (*), to see if we have overlooked anything in our testsuites. If any bugs or unexpected results turn up in your real-time scenarios, we would of course appreciate it very much if these are uncovered before the actual release. As always, we value your input and feedback. Thanks Andreas (*) http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xmlgraphics/fop/branches/fop-0_94/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]