[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook-apps] GSoC Project Idea: integrated LaTeX output support for the stylesheets
Em 05-04-2013 18:19, honyk escreveu:
That is exactly true about XSL FO as well. If you need customizations, you need to know both XSLT and XSL FO. It is just a question of which one you know better, XSL FO or TeX. I've worked with both and I have no problem with either, using a reference I can find out what I want to know. But I think there are more people, who knows TeX than XSL FO.If you need huge customizations in TeX based solutions, you need deep knowledge both XSLT and TeX parts of the production workflow as you usually have to customize both of them.
Let's hope that bright future! But the 5 years you have waited hoping that things are getting better are not a good reason to be so optimistic.Knowing nothing about TeX syntax I simplified my task by concentrating on one well known syntax - XSL-FO (i.e. standard with bright future:).
I'm not saying it should not be fixed but probably I'm not the best person for that since I don't have such a deep knowledge on typesetting. Besides, it is much more about providing an alternative choice, another flavor of rendering printable output from DocBook. You didn't want to learn TeX and better switched to commercial XSL FO product. In the same way, there may be people who do not want to learn XSL FO but know TeX and would be interested in using DocBook over a TeX-based solution.5 yrs ago I hoped that FOP is almost mature product. Unfortunately I still cannot say that. It's a pity. Seeing huge investments in many areas it is a shame that FOP is still on the perifery of the interest. I promise when I earn money I'll suport its development. It deserves it. To be a programmer, instead of creating proposed 'workaround' for FOP issues I'd rather fix them;-)
Gabor
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]