Re: Other paged media processing approach - summary

Dynamic processing is well known by "old style" publishing systems like 
xyvision, app(3b2) etc.
e.g. app(3b2) provides a bunch of variables accessible during the 
rendering process.

The problem with FO is, that for every single requirement you have to 
add a new formatting-attribute to the standard or write an extension. 
E.g:  indentation of a paragraph, but not if it starts on top of a page.
If we could access those kinds variables during a FO rendering 
process,you can express you own rules, how a page should be rendered.


Am 09.02.2013 16:44, schrieb Dave Pawson:
> On 9 February 2013 15:32, Patrick Gundlach <> wrote:
>>> 3. Patrick Gundlach. 9.41 8 Feb
>>>    I believe this to be a variant of Ken Holman ideas?
>> No. The example I gave is only for the trivial case.
>> On my slides at xmlprage I gave an example of a page in a consumer catalog where a possible application is that it should rearrange the page to fit one more product on it (to reduce the total number of pages) by
>> * changing the font size
>> * making images smaller
>> * shuffling the products around
>> * retypesetting the table
>> * removing some images
> Confusion here.
>    How might the stylesheet writer add that information (without excessive cost?)
> <img src=''
>   min-x=''
> min-y=''
> .....
> I.e. where does the user specify that this image might be re-sized in
> order to fit?
> Where do I tell the layout engine that this image (but not that one)
> can be re-sized?
>> this is a fictitious application/example, but we encounter similar demands. This is not possible by predefining some optimizations in the black box renderer and choose the right one, because it is impossible to anticipate all possible customer demands.
> For *a* definition, that is the only way a user can specify allowable
> optimizations?
>    Do you have a different definition?
>> (sorry to insist and to sound like a nitpicker, but looking at the details is crucial to understand why I do this the way I present. I know that I am not good in expressing myself, so don't be too rough with me. I might be wrong of course, but currently I don't see how my applications can be handled by any current or proposed standards except for some easy cases.)
> No problem. We will talk 'past' each other, until we understand each other!
> regards

Received on Monday, 11 February 2013 14:06:59 UTC