W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xproc-dev@w3.org > May 2016

Re: What’s the uptake of FOP 2.1?

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 05:16:08 +0100
To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <87y46wt9tj.fsf@nwalsh.com>
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> writes:
> If I upgraded the XML Calabash print module so that it supported FOP
> 2.1 *instead of* FOP 1.x, would that inconvenience anyone?

Nevermind. I spent an evening hacking about with Java reflection so
that the xmlcalabash-print module supports FOP 1.x or FOP 2.x. Just
put the version of FOP you like in your classpath. Report an problems.

The FOP 2.x APIs are quite different and I don’t really understand
what they’ve done in terms of replacing the URI resolver. If you’re
relying on catalog resolution to find artifacts that FOP needs, you
may discover that FOP 2.x doesn’t do the right thing in XML Calabash.

If that happens, let me know and I’ll dig into it. But I’m not going
to do that proactively at the moment.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh
Lead Engineer
MarkLogic Corporation
Phone: +1 512 761 6676
www.marklogic.com

Received on Friday, 27 May 2016 04:16:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 May 2016 04:16:36 UTC