TEI-L@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU

View:

 Message: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] By Topic: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] By Author: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] Font: Proportional Font

Subject:

Re: tei tables -> fo -> pdf using fop

From:

Date:

Wed, 16 Feb 2005 00:13:44 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

 text/plain (45 lines)
 Paul Tremblay wrote: >*concept* behind it is inferior to FO. LaTeX uses what I call a text >type system, in which new lines and backslashes mean something in >contrast to reading a tree. I think that going from a tree (TEI for >example) to a tree (FO) makes a lot more sense than going from a tree >to text, in which you have to escape certain characters and watch out >for newlines. > sure, the default mode of TeX works like this. It is possible, of course, to make TeX read XML properly, as my PassiveTeX and Hans Hagen's foxet demonstrate. In due course, I expect fotex to become an XSL FO processor of choice. >My feeling --and I don't have hard proof--is that the open source >community is a bit infatuated with text type processing such as you >can achieve with perl. I don't think the open source community has >fully grasped the power of trees. > > I think I'd reply that "the open source" community is not a meaningful group to categorize.... :-} (after all, it has IBM and Sun in it) >Given the status of FOP, I am willing to have another look at LaTeX. >How do you convert from XML to LaTeX? > using XSLT, in text output mode. its trivial, really, to map into \emph{...} >I assume you use PassiveTeX? > > no. PassiveTeX is a TeX-based implementation of XSL FO, which is another direction entirely. I don't recommend it altogether (though its better than FOP). -- Sebastian Rahtz Information Manager, Oxford University Computing Services 13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431 OSS Watch: JISC Open Source Advisory Service http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk