Subject: Re: [xsl] FO Processor choice From: bry@xxxxxxxxxx Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 13:37:27 CET |
>It is not very > stable, unfortunately, if it did less but consistently, it would be > more useful. I am not by any means a big fan of fop but I've found that a system can be built with it that handles most needs, if one is willing to sweat to do it. I'm not exactly sure what was meant by the above reference to needing consistency. I can't think of any fo document I've fed to it that came out looking different each processing instance, so I suppose that it lacks consistency in some other way - generally the sorts of inconsistency that strikes me more as idiosyncracy. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] FO Processor choice, Eliot Kimber | Thread | RE: [xsl] FO Processor choice, G. Ken Holman |
Re: [xsl] XSLT vs Perl, roger . day | Date | Re: [xsl] XSLT vs Perl, bry |
Month |