Re: (dsssl) [help wanted] OpenJade

[Adam Di Carlo <adam@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sebastian Rahtz <sebastian.rahtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Adam Di Carlo writes:
>  > So -- C++ and DSSSL hackers and documenters!  Let them say XSL is the
>  > future -- maybe they are right and maybe not.  Who knows.  Who cares?
>  > We have single sourced documentation with XML and SGML today, with
>  > high-quality printing, and a stable spec, *today*!  Can the XSL-FO
>  > toolchain say that?   I don't think so.
> 
> *If* you regard the jadetex component as part of the "DSSSL Solution",
> then I would make a comment or two
> 
>  a) jadetex is NOT doing a perfect job. it really needs someone to
>  lift it from its present hibernation (twitching occasionally in its
>  sleep), and fix up all the problems.
> 
>  b) if I make an XSL FO file, I can run it through 2 free and 2
>  commercial processors today on this computer (FOP, PassiveTeX,
>  Antenna House, XEP); none of them perfect, but between them I'd claim
>  they (easily) cover more than jadetex

Well, that's good to hear, but it seems to me that the XSL processors
themselves break with every version number which is not prime.  I
wouldn't want to try to make a matrix of what XSL processors work and
break changing with each version of Norm's XSL stylesheets.

> what I do not know (from lack of trying) is whether the PDF and MIF
> backends to Jade do as good a job.

What PDF backend?    You mean the RTF backend?

> To my mind, the OpenJade project should really be pushing the direct
> PDF backend.

Yes, that would be nice.  But we're not in much of a position to push
anything right now.

-- 
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>


 DSSSList info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist