Thank for your fast reply, Sebastian.
Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
>> Do you think that the problem is xmltex or are TeX's boundaries the
>> problem? I mean, do you think it is possible to develop a serious XML
>> processor using TeX as typesetting engine?
> Possibly. The XML-typesetting of ConTeXt is more
> robust and sophisticated; but not that well
> understood by most of us, sadly.
> I'm open to being convinced, but I don't see the
> work being done.
According to Hans Hagen XML typesetting in ConTeXt is fine for simple
documents, but not for complex ones and this might change with LuaTeX.
>> I would like to have something similar to the XML module in ConTeXt for
>> XeLaTeX. I guessed this was xmltex.
> no, definitely not. If you want that, you need to
> persuade Hans Hagen to get an XeTeX-aware ConTeXt.
There is already one. But I'd avoid learning ConTeXt if not strictly
required (not very up-to-date documented and less users to ask).
>> Would you consider FOP or XEP professional XML processors? As far as I
>> know they need XSL-FO. If XML and TeX are about separating content form
>> layout, XSL-FO seems to be a too complex way to typeset texts and it
>> would be not required by TeX.
>> But if FOP or XEP are serious XML processors, the question I'm missing
>> is what they have and xmltex does not.
> Comparing FOP or XEP to xmltex is misleading. xmltex provides
> both a language for writing rules about how to process XML,
> and a typesetting engine. XEP and FOP simply implement a
> page description language. All the intelligence is in the process
> which converts your XML to XSL FO
I only intended to compare FOP or XEP to xmltex as ways of generating
PDF files from XML source.
>> I don't know whether I understand the complexity of the issue. TEI
>> (Lite) is by definition much more complex than its use by a single use
>> or project. But xmltex might be useful to typeset particular projects.
> yes, if your needs are simple, and your XML source
> does not not need complex mangling, you could do
> worse than xmltex. But remember that it's not xetex,
> so it does not do Unicode properly, and its limited to
> traditional TeX ways of doing fonts (ie you can't just
> plug in an OpenType font)
xmltex seems to work with XeTeX avoiding the use of non-ASCII characters
(typesetting English or Latin documents). But I need Unicode for
Spanish, German, Greek and other languages.
But I have been convinced. I will learn XSL for XML transformations into
Thanks for your help,