[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [SOLVED] Expected PDF output of minimal document - total newbie alert!
Denis Bradford <denis.bradford <at> verizon.net> writes: > I think the xsl-region-body error is caused by not setting the processor > extension when you run the xslt: > > fop.extensions — Enable FOP extensions for version 0.20.5 and earlier > fop1.extensions — Enable extensions for FOP version 1 and later Excellent! I found information about fop.extensions in the archives, but I was not aware of fop1.extensions. I suppose that there must be a story behind a product with version 0.94 being called version 1, but anyway... For anyone who might have this problem: C:\>xsltproc --stringparam fop1.extensions 1 --stringparam double.sided 1 path\to\stylesheet your-xml-file> your.fo C:\>fop your.fo your.pdf > > Sorry I misunderstood what you want to do with the blank page. Still, If > you're at the Hello World stage, I think your best bet is to investigate > the XSL processing options, because they provide the all the controls > that you have without customization. > > There are a lot of processing options. The FO-specific parameters are > referenced at http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/doc/fo/. > > To make sense of them, you perhaps already know Bob Stayton's DocBook > XSL The Complete Guide. In the current edition (4), Chapter 8, Printed > Output Options, lays out all the pring options that are available > without customizing anything. > Yes. I will definitely start reading it. When you write a "Hello, world!" program (which you can usually do without digging too deep into the books), you know that it works when you see "Hello, world!" on the screen. After that, you can move on to greater things. Thank you very much. I have spent the last few hours trying to build xmlroff so that I could try a different FO processor. It has a host of dependencies, and being on Windows, it's not easy. I can take a break now. Maybe I'll get back to it one day. At least it should be faster than fop, since it is written in C. By the way, I just noticed that, for whatever reason, my responses went to you and Bob Stayton directly, and not to the list, so I am posting again here.