Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XSL-FO] which xslt processor for .net?

Expand Messages
  • scasquiov squerniovsqui
    thanks for the reply! The features seem great, but I can t afford it unfortunately. I was looking for something along the lines of... free :) or at least not
    Message 1 of 14 , Apr 15, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      thanks for the reply!
      The features seem great, but I can't afford it unfortunately. I was
      looking for something along the lines of... free :) or at least not so
      expensive.



      On 4/15/05, Joseph Ferris <josephmferris@...> wrote:
      >
      > I am not all that familiar with Docbook, so please ignore me if my
      > "newbie" answer does not apply. :-)
      >
      > We use Ibex PDF Creator at work. There is a native .Net component
      > (two actually, since they also provide one for the Compact
      > Framework). It is the best processor that I've used on Windows. In
      > their release notes, they talk about "improved support for Docbook
      > generated FO", although I don't see anything specifically in the
      > documentation.
      >
      > They're web site is: http://www.xmlpdf.com
      >
      > Hope that helps!
      >
      > Joseph
      >
      > --- scasquiov squerniovsqui <scasquiov@...> wrote:
      > > I tried several XSLT processors but couldn't find one that worked
      > > with
      > > the Docbook to XSL-FO stylesheets from the docbook open repository
      > > and
      > > that could be embeded into my application.
      > >
      > > both .NET's classes for XSL Transformations and Saxon.NET don't
      > > seem
      > > to handle the stylesheets the way they should (several errors come
      > > up;
      > > from the info I could gather is seems there are some limitations in
      > > both these implementations).
      > > I found a lot of other XSLT processor but none of them seems to
      > > have
      > > .NET bindings so that it can be embedded into the application.
      > > Invoking java's version of Saxon would work for example but I'm
      > > trying to avoid having external dependencies. Making sure java is
      > > installed would be another step in the installation process and I'd
      > > rather not have it.
      > >
      > > Has anyone else needed to use docbook_to_FO stylesheets in .NET?
      > > which xslt processor have you used?
      > >
      > >
      > > thanks in advance!
      > >
      >
      > __________________________________
      > Do you Yahoo!?
      > Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
      > http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Fournier,Danny [NCR]
      Not sure how this would tie in to Docbook. I use FOP from the Apache.org http://xml.apache.org/fop/ You would need to execute the .bat file with the proper
      Message 2 of 14 , Apr 15, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Not sure how this would tie in to Docbook.

        I use FOP from the Apache.org
        http://xml.apache.org/fop/

        You would need to execute the .bat file with the proper parameters. It's
        not the best, takes a few seconds to generate the PDF here, but it's
        free and does a good job generating the PDFs.


        -----Original Message-----
        From: XSL-FO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:XSL-FO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
        Of scasquiov squerniovsqui
        Sent: April 15, 2005 10:57 AM
        To: XSL-FO@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [XSL-FO] which xslt processor for .net?



        thanks for the reply!
        The features seem great, but I can't afford it unfortunately. I was
        looking for something along the lines of... free :) or at least not so
        expensive.



        On 4/15/05, Joseph Ferris <josephmferris@...> wrote:
        >
        > I am not all that familiar with Docbook, so please ignore me if my
        > "newbie" answer does not apply. :-)
        >
        > We use Ibex PDF Creator at work. There is a native .Net component
        > (two actually, since they also provide one for the Compact
        > Framework). It is the best processor that I've used on Windows. In
        > their release notes, they talk about "improved support for Docbook
        > generated FO", although I don't see anything specifically in the
        > documentation.
        >
        > They're web site is: http://www.xmlpdf.com
        >
        > Hope that helps!
        >
        > Joseph
        >
        > --- scasquiov squerniovsqui <scasquiov@...> wrote:
        > > I tried several XSLT processors but couldn't find one that worked
        > > with
        > > the Docbook to XSL-FO stylesheets from the docbook open repository
        > > and
        > > that could be embeded into my application.
        > >
        > > both .NET's classes for XSL Transformations and Saxon.NET don't
        > > seem
        > > to handle the stylesheets the way they should (several errors come
        > > up;
        > > from the info I could gather is seems there are some limitations in
        > > both these implementations).
        > > I found a lot of other XSLT processor but none of them seems to
        > > have
        > > .NET bindings so that it can be embedded into the application.
        > > Invoking java's version of Saxon would work for example but I'm
        > > trying to avoid having external dependencies. Making sure java is
        > > installed would be another step in the installation process and I'd
        > > rather not have it.
        > >
        > > Has anyone else needed to use docbook_to_FO stylesheets in .NET?
        > > which xslt processor have you used?
        > >
        > >
        > > thanks in advance!
        > >
        >
        > __________________________________
        > Do you Yahoo!?
        > Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
        > http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >



        Yahoo! Groups Links
      • Mike Trotman
        If you are using Windows - have you tried using Microsoft s MSXML4 SDK via COM? It is VERY fast, works on LARGE documents without choking and is XSLT1.0
        Message 3 of 14 , Apr 15, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          If you are using Windows - have you tried using Microsoft's MSXML4 SDK
          via COM?
          It is VERY fast, works on LARGE documents without choking and is XSLT1.0
          compliant (apart from <xsl:message>) and works smoothly in .NET
          applications.
          Did I mention it's VERY fast?
          It's about 4 times faster than anything else I have seen - and about 100
          times faster than the native .NET - which I have given up using.
          (I also use xsltproc, saxon, xalan, sablotron on the command line for
          testing etc.)
          It is also free and comes with good documentation.

          I haven't tried Docbook - but it's worked on everything else.
          Although - doesn't have EXSLT functions but has it's own
          msxsl:node-set() + others.
          Scripting language is VBScript.

          Mike

          scasquiov squerniovsqui wrote:

          >I tried several XSLT processors but couldn't find one that worked with
          >the Docbook to XSL-FO stylesheets from the docbook open repository and
          >that could be embeded into my application.
          >
          >both .NET's classes for XSL Transformations and Saxon.NET don't seem
          >to handle the stylesheets the way they should (several errors come up;
          >from the info I could gather is seems there are some limitations in
          >both these implementations).
          >I found a lot of other XSLT processor but none of them seems to have
          >.NET bindings so that it can be embedded into the application.
          > Invoking java's version of Saxon would work for example but I'm
          >trying to avoid having external dependencies. Making sure java is
          >installed would be another step in the installation process and I'd
          >rather not have it.
          >
          > Has anyone else needed to use docbook_to_FO stylesheets in .NET?
          >which xslt processor have you used?
          >
          >
          >thanks in advance!
          >
          >
          >
          >Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >




          --
          No virus found in this outgoing message.
          Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
          Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.11 - Release Date: 14/04/2005
        • scasquiov squerniovsqui
          I m using a port of FOP for .NET (nFOP) and it works fine for generating PDFs (for other output formats I ll have to find other options in the future though).
          Message 4 of 14 , Apr 15, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            I'm using a port of FOP for .NET (nFOP) and it works fine for
            generating PDFs (for other output formats I'll have to find other
            options in the future though).
            The issue is which XSLT processor to use to transform Docbook to
            XSL-FO, before transforming the obtained XSL-FO to PDF.



            On 4/15/05, Fournier,Danny [NCR] <Danny.Fournier@...> wrote:
            >
            > Not sure how this would tie in to Docbook.
            >
            > I use FOP from the Apache.org
            > http://xml.apache.org/fop/
            >
            > You would need to execute the .bat file with the proper parameters. It's
            > not the best, takes a few seconds to generate the PDF here, but it's
            > free and does a good job generating the PDFs.
            >
            >
            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: XSL-FO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:XSL-FO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
            > Of scasquiov squerniovsqui
            > Sent: April 15, 2005 10:57 AM
            > To: XSL-FO@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: Re: [XSL-FO] which xslt processor for .net?
            >
            > thanks for the reply!
            > The features seem great, but I can't afford it unfortunately. I was
            > looking for something along the lines of... free :) or at least not so
            > expensive.
            >
            > On 4/15/05, Joseph Ferris <josephmferris@...> wrote:
            > >
            > > I am not all that familiar with Docbook, so please ignore me if my
            > > "newbie" answer does not apply. :-)
            > >
            > > We use Ibex PDF Creator at work. There is a native .Net component
            > > (two actually, since they also provide one for the Compact
            > > Framework). It is the best processor that I've used on Windows. In
            > > their release notes, they talk about "improved support for Docbook
            > > generated FO", although I don't see anything specifically in the
            > > documentation.
            > >
            > > They're web site is: http://www.xmlpdf.com
            > >
            > > Hope that helps!
            > >
            > > Joseph
            > >
            > > --- scasquiov squerniovsqui <scasquiov@...> wrote:
            > > > I tried several XSLT processors but couldn't find one that worked
            > > > with
            > > > the Docbook to XSL-FO stylesheets from the docbook open repository
            > > > and
            > > > that could be embeded into my application.
            > > >
            > > > both .NET's classes for XSL Transformations and Saxon.NET don't
            > > > seem
            > > > to handle the stylesheets the way they should (several errors come
            > > > up;
            > > > from the info I could gather is seems there are some limitations in
            > > > both these implementations).
            > > > I found a lot of other XSLT processor but none of them seems to
            > > > have
            > > > .NET bindings so that it can be embedded into the application.
            > > > Invoking java's version of Saxon would work for example but I'm
            > > > trying to avoid having external dependencies. Making sure java is
            > > > installed would be another step in the installation process and I'd
            > > > rather not have it.
            > > >
            > > > Has anyone else needed to use docbook_to_FO stylesheets in .NET?
            > > > which xslt processor have you used?
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > thanks in advance!
            > > >
            > >
            > > __________________________________
            > > Do you Yahoo!?
            > > Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
            > > http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
            > >
            > > Yahoo! Groups Links
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • scasquiov squerniovsqui
            Hmm, that means I would have to ensure MSXML4.0 is installed when installing my app right? I would rather have the minimum external dependenciesl i can, but if
            Message 5 of 14 , Apr 15, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Hmm, that means I would have to ensure MSXML4.0 is installed when
              installing my app right? I would rather have the minimum external
              dependenciesl i can, but if an extra dependency is required this is
              probably the best option. do you know if I can use this independently
              of whether MSXML is installed or not?

              From the other XSLT processor I've tried I liked xsltproc (libxml)
              (well, It was one of the few that I managed to use with docbook open
              repository stylesheets actually :)
              also, it has no dependencies on anything else installed on the system.
              the downside is that there are no bindings to .NET, I could use
              pinvoke() for that but it seems far too much work.

              Portability will be a issue on the long term though, for now I don't
              mind using MSXML (especially if i don't really need it "installed" on
              the target computer) but xsltproc also seems promissing as it exists
              in both windows and linux.

              Cheers,



              On 4/15/05, Mike Trotman <mike.trotman@...> wrote:
              >
              > If you are using Windows - have you tried using Microsoft's MSXML4 SDK
              > via COM?
              > It is VERY fast, works on LARGE documents without choking and is XSLT1.0
              > compliant (apart from <xsl:message>) and works smoothly in .NET
              > applications.
              > Did I mention it's VERY fast?
              > It's about 4 times faster than anything else I have seen - and about 100
              > times faster than the native .NET - which I have given up using.
              > (I also use xsltproc, saxon, xalan, sablotron on the command line for
              > testing etc.)
              > It is also free and comes with good documentation.
              >
              > I haven't tried Docbook - but it's worked on everything else.
              > Although - doesn't have EXSLT functions but has it's own
              > msxsl:node-set() + others.
              > Scripting language is VBScript.
              >
              > Mike
            • Mike Trotman
              If you use version 3.0 of MSXML - then that is the one installed with Internet Explorer - so should be generally available. Version 4.0 could also be installed
              Message 6 of 14 , Apr 15, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                If you use version 3.0 of MSXML - then that is the one installed with
                Internet Explorer - so should be generally available.
                Version 4.0 could also be installed on machines.
                It installs in 'standalone' mode (can't remember the name - but means it
                doesn't interfere with any othe MSXML installations).
                As it's freely available - I'm not sure if you could just package the
                DLLs with your installation.
                (I haven't tried this - or looked at the licensing details.)

                Although I haven't heard of a .NET version of libxml2/libxslt there are
                some shortcuts to write one to implement the features you need.
                e.g. using ActiveStatePerl Toolkit and the XML::LibXSLT module.

                Mike

                P.S. I did mention version 4.0 is VERY fast didn't I?

                scasquiov squerniovsqui wrote:

                > Hmm, that means I would have to ensure MSXML4.0 is installed when
                >installing my app right? I would rather have the minimum external
                >dependenciesl i can, but if an extra dependency is required this is
                >probably the best option. do you know if I can use this independently
                >of whether MSXML is installed or not?
                >
                > From the other XSLT processor I've tried I liked xsltproc (libxml)
                >(well, It was one of the few that I managed to use with docbook open
                >repository stylesheets actually :)
                >also, it has no dependencies on anything else installed on the system.
                >the downside is that there are no bindings to .NET, I could use
                >pinvoke() for that but it seems far too much work.
                >
                > Portability will be a issue on the long term though, for now I don't
                >mind using MSXML (especially if i don't really need it "installed" on
                >the target computer) but xsltproc also seems promissing as it exists
                >in both windows and linux.
                >
                > Cheers,
                >
                >
                >
                >On 4/15/05, Mike Trotman <mike.trotman@...> wrote:
                >
                >
                >>If you are using Windows - have you tried using Microsoft's MSXML4 SDK
                >>via COM?
                >>It is VERY fast, works on LARGE documents without choking and is XSLT1.0
                >>compliant (apart from <xsl:message>) and works smoothly in .NET
                >>applications.
                >>Did I mention it's VERY fast?
                >>It's about 4 times faster than anything else I have seen - and about 100
                >>times faster than the native .NET - which I have given up using.
                >>(I also use xsltproc, saxon, xalan, sablotron on the command line for
                >>testing etc.)
                >>It is also free and comes with good documentation.
                >>
                >>I haven't tried Docbook - but it's worked on everything else.
                >>Although - doesn't have EXSLT functions but has it's own
                >>msxsl:node-set() + others.
                >>Scripting language is VBScript.
                >>
                >>Mike
                >>
                >>
                >
                >
                >
                >Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >



                --
                No virus found in this outgoing message.
                Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
                Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.11 - Release Date: 14/04/2005
              • Dave Pawson
                ... If you want standards compliance, Saxon 6.5.3 is probably the best bet. The MSXSL one screws with white space in the parser stage, which can be annoying.
                Message 7 of 14 , Apr 15, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 16:54 +0100, scasquiov squerniovsqui wrote:
                  > Hmm, that means I would have to ensure MSXML4.0 is installed when
                  > installing my app right? I would rather have the minimum external
                  > dependenciesl i can, but if an extra dependency is required this is
                  > probably the best option. do you know if I can use this independently
                  > of whether MSXML is installed or not?
                  >
                  > From the other XSLT processor I've tried I liked xsltproc (libxml)
                  > (well, It was one of the few that I managed to use with docbook open
                  > repository stylesheets actually :)
                  > also, it has no dependencies on anything else installed on the system.
                  > the downside is that there are no bindings to .NET, I could use
                  > pinvoke() for that but it seems far too much work.
                  >
                  > Portability will be a issue on the long term though,


                  If you want standards compliance, Saxon 6.5.3 is probably the best bet.

                  The MSXSL one screws with white space in the parser stage, which can
                  be annoying. The Saxon .net port of saxon 8, for xslt 2.0 (not yet
                  supported
                  by the Docbook stylesheets) is looking promising.

                  HTH

                  --
                  Regards,

                  Dave Pawson
                  XSLT + Docbook FAQ
                  http://www.dpawson.co.uk
                • Ryan Graham
                  Hmm, that means I would have to ensure MSXML4.0 is installed when installing my app right? I would rather have the minimum external dependenciesl i can, but if
                  Message 8 of 14 , Apr 15, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hmm, that means I would have to ensure MSXML4.0 is installed when
                    installing my app right? I would rather have the minimum external
                    dependenciesl i can, but if an extra dependency is required this is
                    probably the best option. do you know if I can use this independently
                    of whether MSXML is installed or not?

                    From the other XSLT processor I've tried I liked xsltproc (libxml)
                    (well, It was one of the few that I managed to use with docbook open
                    repository stylesheets actually :)
                    also, it has no dependencies on anything else installed on the system.
                    the downside is that there are no bindings to .NET, I could use
                    pinvoke() for that but it seems far too much work.

                    Portability will be a issue on the long term though, for now I don't
                    mind using MSXML (especially if i don't really need it "installed" on
                    the target computer) but xsltproc also seems promissing as it exists
                    in both windows and linux.

                    ___________________________

                    Saxon 6.5.3 is the best in our experience. As for .Net, it is not very
                    difficult to call Saxon as an external process in .Net. This should be worth
                    exploring, especially if you are concerned about compliance.

                    HTH,
                    RG



                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • scasquiov squerniovsqui
                    ... I am, but for saxon 6.5.3 I would need to ensure Java is installed, and I m really trying to cut down on external dependencies as much as possible.
                    Message 9 of 14 , Apr 15, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      > Saxon 6.5.3 is the best in our experience. As for .Net, it is not very
                      > difficult to call Saxon as an external process in .Net. This should be worth
                      > exploring, especially if you are concerned about compliance.

                      I am, but for saxon 6.5.3 I would need to ensure Java is installed,
                      and I'm really trying to cut down on external dependencies as much as
                      possible. Saxon.NET would be the best choice i think (this would mean
                      depending on the J# libraries, but i already depend on them for nFOP)
                      I would get both standards compliance and everything nicely packed
                      into a single setup package :) to bad it doesn't work with the
                      docbook XSLs (yet, I hope).

                      Sacrificing a bit of compliance in favor of having fewer
                      dependencies, MSXML and xsltproc seem to be the most attractive
                      options.

                      thanks!
                      FC
                    • Dave Pawson
                      ... And since xslt 2 isn t a rec yet, you wouldn t (strictly) be compliant. ... Check that xsltproc processes the docbook you intend to use first. regards
                      Message 10 of 14 , Apr 16, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Sat, 2005-04-16 at 01:49 +0100, scasquiov squerniovsqui wrote:
                        > > Saxon 6.5.3 is the best in our experience. As for .Net, it is not very
                        > > difficult to call Saxon as an external process in .Net. This should be worth
                        > > exploring, especially if you are concerned about compliance.
                        >
                        > I am, but for saxon 6.5.3 I would need to ensure Java is installed,
                        > and I'm really trying to cut down on external dependencies as much as
                        > possible. Saxon.NET would be the best choice i think (this would mean
                        > depending on the J# libraries, but i already depend on them for nFOP)
                        > I would get both standards compliance and everything nicely packed
                        > into a single setup package :) to bad it doesn't work with the
                        > docbook XSLs (yet, I hope).

                        And since xslt 2 isn't a rec yet, you wouldn't (strictly) be compliant.

                        >
                        > Sacrificing a bit of compliance in favor of having fewer
                        > dependencies, MSXML and xsltproc seem to be the most attractive
                        > options.

                        Check that xsltproc processes the docbook you intend to use first.

                        regards DaveP
                      • Altsoft Xml2PDF
                        There is a number of limitations in the built-in Microsoft .NET Framework XslTransform (System.Xml.Xsl.XslTransform) class which makes Microsoft .NET XSLT
                        Message 11 of 14 , Apr 18, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          There is a number of limitations in the built-in Microsoft .NET Framework
                          XslTransform (System.Xml.Xsl.XslTransform) class which makes Microsoft
                          .NET XSLT compiler incompatible with DocBook stylesheets.

                          There is the patch for the latest docbook-xsl version (1.68.1) that fixes
                          these problems in FO stylesheets. Please find additional information
                          here:
                          http://alt-soft.com/support_kb_docbook_and_net_xsltransform.jsp


                          Best Regards,
                          Altsoft Xml2PDF Team
                          http://alt-soft.com/products_xml2pdf.jsp



                          > -----Original Message-----
                          > From: XSL-FO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:XSL-FO@yahoogroups.com]
                          > On Behalf Of scasquiov squerniovsqui
                          > Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 1:45 AM
                          > To: XSL-FO@yahoogroups.com
                          > Subject: [XSL-FO] which xslt processor for .net?
                          >
                          >
                          > I tried several XSLT processors but couldn't find one that
                          > worked with the Docbook to XSL-FO stylesheets from the
                          > docbook open repository and that could be embeded into my application.
                          >
                          > both .NET's classes for XSL Transformations and Saxon.NET
                          > don't seem to handle the stylesheets the way they should
                          > (several errors come up; from the info I could gather is
                          > seems there are some limitations in both these implementations).
                          > I found a lot of other XSLT processor but none of them seems
                          > to have .NET bindings so that it can be embedded into the application.
                          > Invoking java's version of Saxon would work for example but
                          > I'm trying to avoid having external dependencies. Making sure
                          > java is installed would be another step in the installation
                          > process and I'd rather not have it.
                          >
                          > Has anyone else needed to use docbook_to_FO stylesheets in .NET?
                          > which xslt processor have you used?
                          >
                          >
                          > thanks in advance!
                        • scasquiov squerniovsqui
                          Thanks! this patch is a big help, transforming via .Net s classes seem to be working now. The generated FO doesn t seem to be handled well by nFOP but I
                          Message 12 of 14 , Apr 19, 2005
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Thanks! this patch is a big help, transforming via .Net's classes seem
                            to be working now. The generated FO doesn't seem to be handled well by
                            nFOP but I haven't yet managed to determine exactly what is going
                            wrong. have to look at it better.

                            Best regards,
                            FC
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.