*.fo.ftl
Locked
 
|
Were these files coded by hand, or was some sort of a WYSIWYG editor
used? I need to modify the pack slip and it's a bit of a headache. Does anyone know of a decent, free editor/designer I might be able to use? Thanks. |
|
|
Sanders, Brian wrote:
> Were these files coded by hand, or was some sort of a WYSIWYG editor > used? I need to modify the pack slip and it's a bit of a headache. Does > anyone know of a decent, free editor/designer I might be able to use? > Thanks. > > > I did not find any editor, but there is a quite useful book: Jacek XSL-FO by Dave Pawson <http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/941?x-t=book.view> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Publisher: O'Reilly Media, Inc. Pub Date: August 19, 2002 Print ISBN-13: 978-0-596-00355-5 Pages: 300 |
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by bsanders1979
AFAIK, there are no free editors but some commercials (Google for <<editor "xsf:fo">>)
Jacques From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> Were these files coded by hand, or was some sort of a WYSIWYG editor used? I need to modify the pack slip and it's a bit of a headache. Does anyone know of a decent, free editor/designer I might be able to use? Thanks. |
|
Administrator
|
Ha yes : xslfast
Jacques From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> > AFAIK, there are no free editors but some commercials (Google for <<editor "xsf:fo">>) > > Jacques > > From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> > Were these files coded by hand, or was some sort of a WYSIWYG editor > used? I need to modify the pack slip and it's a bit of a headache. Does > anyone know of a decent, free editor/designer I might be able to use? > Thanks. > > > |
|
|
Tis a commercial product. So, were these files hand coded then?
-----Original Message----- From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 11:33 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: *.fo.ftl Ha yes : xslfast Jacques From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> > AFAIK, there are no free editors but some commercials (Google for <<editor "xsf:fo">>) > > Jacques > > From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> > Were these files coded by hand, or was some sort of a WYSIWYG editor > used? I need to modify the pack slip and it's a bit of a headache. Does > anyone know of a decent, free editor/designer I might be able to use? > Thanks. > > > |
|
Administrator
|
Yes
Jacques From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> > Tis a commercial product. So, were these files hand coded then? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 11:33 AM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: *.fo.ftl > > Ha yes : xslfast > > Jacques > > From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >> AFAIK, there are no free editors but some commercials (Google for > <<editor "xsf:fo">>) >> >> Jacques >> >> From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> >> Were these files coded by hand, or was some sort of a WYSIWYG editor >> used? I need to modify the pack slip and it's a bit of a headache. > Does >> anyone know of a decent, free editor/designer I might be able to use? >> Thanks. >> >> >> > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by bsanders1979
"Hand-coding" XSL-FO is a lot like direct editing of HTML and CSS. Some people like editors that behave like a word processor so they never have to see an HTML tag, but most people (especially in recent years) seem to just go for the direct manipulation of HTML and CSS. There are very few web sites, especially dynamic (database driven) web sites, that don't have some or all of the HTML and CSS manually written. Part of the problem is that if you want flexibility then you can't effectively use many of the WYSIWIG style tools, so they're really only good for simple sites. This is made more dramatic by browser compatibility problems and such. For XSL-FO the problem is a lot easier since the standards are better (and more consistently followed, unlike HTML and CSS). My guess about why such things are not more common is the same as for many tools, including tools for things in OFBiz: doing it by direct text editing is not that hard, so there just isn't much demand for special tools. BTW, I'm talking specifically about things that are NOT static documents. None of the XSL-FO templates in OFBiz are used for static documents, so in addition to the editor having to understand XSL-FO it also has to understand the dynamic parts of the document... and that makes the editor a lot more complicated and a lot less useful compared to just editing the files. So yes, all of the HTML, CSS, XSL-FO, JavaScript, Java, XML, etc, etc in OFBiz is created by hand (ever since late 2001 anyway, when we decided that good tool design is a better approach than code generation for poorly designed tools). -David On Mar 5, 2009, at 11:00 AM, Sanders, Brian wrote: > Tis a commercial product. So, were these files hand coded then? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 11:33 AM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: *.fo.ftl > > Ha yes : xslfast > > Jacques > > From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >> AFAIK, there are no free editors but some commercials (Google for > <<editor "xsf:fo">>) >> >> Jacques >> >> From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> >> Were these files coded by hand, or was some sort of a WYSIWYG editor >> used? I need to modify the pack slip and it's a bit of a headache. > Does >> anyone know of a decent, free editor/designer I might be able to use? >> Thanks. >> >> >> > |
|
|
I don't necessarily rely on such tools, but they are good for creating a
rough draft of the end result. Once you get the general look you're going for, then you go and hand-edit the code. I did find some tools on the net that will convert HTML to FO. They're not perfect, but they may be somewhat viable. -----Original Message----- From: David E Jones [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 1:33 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: *.fo.ftl "Hand-coding" XSL-FO is a lot like direct editing of HTML and CSS. Some people like editors that behave like a word processor so they never have to see an HTML tag, but most people (especially in recent years) seem to just go for the direct manipulation of HTML and CSS. There are very few web sites, especially dynamic (database driven) web sites, that don't have some or all of the HTML and CSS manually written. Part of the problem is that if you want flexibility then you can't effectively use many of the WYSIWIG style tools, so they're really only good for simple sites. This is made more dramatic by browser compatibility problems and such. For XSL-FO the problem is a lot easier since the standards are better (and more consistently followed, unlike HTML and CSS). My guess about why such things are not more common is the same as for many tools, including tools for things in OFBiz: doing it by direct text editing is not that hard, so there just isn't much demand for special tools. BTW, I'm talking specifically about things that are NOT static documents. None of the XSL-FO templates in OFBiz are used for static documents, so in addition to the editor having to understand XSL-FO it also has to understand the dynamic parts of the document... and that makes the editor a lot more complicated and a lot less useful compared to just editing the files. So yes, all of the HTML, CSS, XSL-FO, JavaScript, Java, XML, etc, etc in OFBiz is created by hand (ever since late 2001 anyway, when we decided that good tool design is a better approach than code generation for poorly designed tools). -David On Mar 5, 2009, at 11:00 AM, Sanders, Brian wrote: > Tis a commercial product. So, were these files hand coded then? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 11:33 AM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: *.fo.ftl > > Ha yes : xslfast > > Jacques > > From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >> AFAIK, there are no free editors but some commercials (Google for > <<editor "xsf:fo">>) >> >> Jacques >> >> From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> >> Were these files coded by hand, or was some sort of a WYSIWYG editor >> used? I need to modify the pack slip and it's a bit of a headache. > Does >> anyone know of a decent, free editor/designer I might be able to use? >> Thanks. >> >> >> > |
|
Administrator
|
If you get a chance after testing those tools, could you send use a feedback ?
TIA Jacques From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> >I don't necessarily rely on such tools, but they are good for creating a > rough draft of the end result. Once you get the general look you're > going for, then you go and hand-edit the code. I did find some tools on > the net that will convert HTML to FO. They're not perfect, but they may > be somewhat viable. > > -----Original Message----- > From: David E Jones [mailto:[hidden email]] > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 1:33 PM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: *.fo.ftl > > > "Hand-coding" XSL-FO is a lot like direct editing of HTML and CSS. > Some people like editors that behave like a word processor so they > never have to see an HTML tag, but most people (especially in recent > years) seem to just go for the direct manipulation of HTML and CSS. > There are very few web sites, especially dynamic (database driven) web > sites, that don't have some or all of the HTML and CSS manually > written. Part of the problem is that if you want flexibility then you > can't effectively use many of the WYSIWIG style tools, so they're > really only good for simple sites. This is made more dramatic by > browser compatibility problems and such. > > For XSL-FO the problem is a lot easier since the standards are better > (and more consistently followed, unlike HTML and CSS). My guess about > why such things are not more common is the same as for many tools, > including tools for things in OFBiz: doing it by direct text editing > is not that hard, so there just isn't much demand for special tools. > > BTW, I'm talking specifically about things that are NOT static > documents. None of the XSL-FO templates in OFBiz are used for static > documents, so in addition to the editor having to understand XSL-FO it > also has to understand the dynamic parts of the document... and that > makes the editor a lot more complicated and a lot less useful compared > to just editing the files. > > So yes, all of the HTML, CSS, XSL-FO, JavaScript, Java, XML, etc, etc > in OFBiz is created by hand (ever since late 2001 anyway, when we > decided that good tool design is a better approach than code > generation for poorly designed tools). > > -David > > > On Mar 5, 2009, at 11:00 AM, Sanders, Brian wrote: > >> Tis a commercial product. So, were these files hand coded then? >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] >> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 11:33 AM >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: *.fo.ftl >> >> Ha yes : xslfast >> >> Jacques >> >> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >>> AFAIK, there are no free editors but some commercials (Google for >> <<editor "xsf:fo">>) >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> >>> Were these files coded by hand, or was some sort of a WYSIWYG editor >>> used? I need to modify the pack slip and it's a bit of a headache. >> Does >>> anyone know of a decent, free editor/designer I might be able to use? >>> Thanks. >>> >>> >>> >> > > |
|
|
I found a free WYSIWYG editor (GPLed, Qt libs):
http://code.google.com/p/fop-miniscribus/downloads/list Beta looks good and it was released only months ago. It is tested against Apache-fo. I did not try much more though. Years ago I used this http://sourceforge.net/projects/html2fo#item3rd-6 which is probably what Brian is referring to. It is command line program and is clearly abandonware. I remember it worked well for tables. Enough at the time ... ;) -- Daniel Martínez Jacques Le Roux escribió: > If you get a chance after testing those tools, could you send use a > feedback ? > > TIA > > Jacques > > From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> >> I don't necessarily rely on such tools, but they are good for creating a >> rough draft of the end result. Once you get the general look you're >> going for, then you go and hand-edit the code. I did find some tools on >> the net that will convert HTML to FO. They're not perfect, but they may >> be somewhat viable. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: David E Jones [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: >> Thursday, March 05, 2009 1:33 PM >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: *.fo.ftl >> >> >> "Hand-coding" XSL-FO is a lot like direct editing of HTML and CSS. >> Some people like editors that behave like a word processor so they >> never have to see an HTML tag, but most people (especially in recent >> years) seem to just go for the direct manipulation of HTML and CSS. >> There are very few web sites, especially dynamic (database driven) >> web sites, that don't have some or all of the HTML and CSS manually >> written. Part of the problem is that if you want flexibility then >> you can't effectively use many of the WYSIWIG style tools, so >> they're really only good for simple sites. This is made more >> dramatic by browser compatibility problems and such. >> >> For XSL-FO the problem is a lot easier since the standards are >> better (and more consistently followed, unlike HTML and CSS). My >> guess about why such things are not more common is the same as for >> many tools, including tools for things in OFBiz: doing it by direct >> text editing is not that hard, so there just isn't much demand for >> special tools. >> >> BTW, I'm talking specifically about things that are NOT static >> documents. None of the XSL-FO templates in OFBiz are used for static >> documents, so in addition to the editor having to understand XSL-FO >> it also has to understand the dynamic parts of the document... and >> that makes the editor a lot more complicated and a lot less useful >> compared to just editing the files. >> >> So yes, all of the HTML, CSS, XSL-FO, JavaScript, Java, XML, etc, >> etc in OFBiz is created by hand (ever since late 2001 anyway, when >> we decided that good tool design is a better approach than code >> generation for poorly designed tools). >> >> -David >> >> >> On Mar 5, 2009, at 11:00 AM, Sanders, Brian wrote: >> >>> Tis a commercial product. So, were these files hand coded then? >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] >>> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 11:33 AM >>> To: [hidden email] >>> Subject: Re: *.fo.ftl >>> >>> Ha yes : xslfast >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >>>> AFAIK, there are no free editors but some commercials (Google for >>> <<editor "xsf:fo">>) >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>> From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> >>>> Were these files coded by hand, or was some sort of a WYSIWYG editor >>>> used? I need to modify the pack slip and it's a bit of a headache. >>> Does >>>> anyone know of a decent, free editor/designer I might be able to use? >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > |
|
Administrator
|
Thanks Daniel,
I will put a link into FAQ Jacques From: "Daniel Martínez" <[hidden email]> >I found a free WYSIWYG editor (GPLed, Qt libs): > > http://code.google.com/p/fop-miniscribus/downloads/list > > Beta looks good and it was released only months ago. It is tested against Apache-fo. I did not try much more though. > > Years ago I used this > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/html2fo#item3rd-6 > > which is probably what Brian is referring to. It is command line program and is clearly abandonware. I remember it worked well for > tables. Enough at the time ... ;) > -- > Daniel Martínez > > Jacques Le Roux escribió: >> If you get a chance after testing those tools, could you send use a feedback ? >> >> TIA >> >> Jacques >> >> From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> >>> I don't necessarily rely on such tools, but they are good for creating a >>> rough draft of the end result. Once you get the general look you're >>> going for, then you go and hand-edit the code. I did find some tools on >>> the net that will convert HTML to FO. They're not perfect, but they may >>> be somewhat viable. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: David E Jones [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 1:33 PM >>> To: [hidden email] >>> Subject: Re: *.fo.ftl >>> >>> >>> "Hand-coding" XSL-FO is a lot like direct editing of HTML and CSS. Some people like editors that behave like a word processor >>> so they never have to see an HTML tag, but most people (especially in recent years) seem to just go for the direct >>> manipulation of HTML and CSS. There are very few web sites, especially dynamic (database driven) web sites, that don't have >>> some or all of the HTML and CSS manually written. Part of the problem is that if you want flexibility then you can't >>> effectively use many of the WYSIWIG style tools, so they're really only good for simple sites. This is made more dramatic by >>> browser compatibility problems and such. >>> >>> For XSL-FO the problem is a lot easier since the standards are better (and more consistently followed, unlike HTML and CSS). My >>> guess about why such things are not more common is the same as for many tools, including tools for things in OFBiz: doing it >>> by direct text editing is not that hard, so there just isn't much demand for special tools. >>> >>> BTW, I'm talking specifically about things that are NOT static documents. None of the XSL-FO templates in OFBiz are used for >>> static documents, so in addition to the editor having to understand XSL-FO it also has to understand the dynamic parts of the >>> document... and that makes the editor a lot more complicated and a lot less useful compared to just editing the files. >>> >>> So yes, all of the HTML, CSS, XSL-FO, JavaScript, Java, XML, etc, etc in OFBiz is created by hand (ever since late 2001 anyway, >>> when we decided that good tool design is a better approach than code generation for poorly designed tools). >>> >>> -David >>> >>> >>> On Mar 5, 2009, at 11:00 AM, Sanders, Brian wrote: >>> >>>> Tis a commercial product. So, were these files hand coded then? >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 11:33 AM >>>> To: [hidden email] >>>> Subject: Re: *.fo.ftl >>>> >>>> Ha yes : xslfast >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >>>>> AFAIK, there are no free editors but some commercials (Google for >>>> <<editor "xsf:fo">>) >>>>> >>>>> Jacques >>>>> >>>>> From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> >>>>> Were these files coded by hand, or was some sort of a WYSIWYG editor >>>>> used? I need to modify the pack slip and it's a bit of a headache. >>>> Does >>>>> anyone know of a decent, free editor/designer I might be able to use? >>>>> Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > |
|
Administrator
|
Done at http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBIZ/FAQ+-+Tips+-+Tricks+-+Cookbook+-+HowTo#FAQ-Tips-Tricks-Cookbook-HowTo-XSL:FO(FOP)
Jacques From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> > Thanks Daniel, > > I will put a link into FAQ > > Jacques > > From: "Daniel Martínez" <[hidden email]> >>I found a free WYSIWYG editor (GPLed, Qt libs): >> >> http://code.google.com/p/fop-miniscribus/downloads/list >> >> Beta looks good and it was released only months ago. It is tested against Apache-fo. I did not try much more though. >> >> Years ago I used this >> >> http://sourceforge.net/projects/html2fo#item3rd-6 >> >> which is probably what Brian is referring to. It is command line program and is clearly abandonware. I remember it worked well >> for tables. Enough at the time ... ;) >> -- >> Daniel Martínez >> >> Jacques Le Roux escribió: >>> If you get a chance after testing those tools, could you send use a feedback ? >>> >>> TIA >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> >>>> I don't necessarily rely on such tools, but they are good for creating a >>>> rough draft of the end result. Once you get the general look you're >>>> going for, then you go and hand-edit the code. I did find some tools on >>>> the net that will convert HTML to FO. They're not perfect, but they may >>>> be somewhat viable. >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: David E Jones [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 1:33 PM >>>> To: [hidden email] >>>> Subject: Re: *.fo.ftl >>>> >>>> >>>> "Hand-coding" XSL-FO is a lot like direct editing of HTML and CSS. Some people like editors that behave like a word processor >>>> so they never have to see an HTML tag, but most people (especially in recent years) seem to just go for the direct >>>> manipulation of HTML and CSS. There are very few web sites, especially dynamic (database driven) web sites, that don't have >>>> some or all of the HTML and CSS manually written. Part of the problem is that if you want flexibility then you can't >>>> effectively use many of the WYSIWIG style tools, so they're really only good for simple sites. This is made more dramatic by >>>> browser compatibility problems and such. >>>> >>>> For XSL-FO the problem is a lot easier since the standards are better (and more consistently followed, unlike HTML and CSS). >>>> My guess about why such things are not more common is the same as for many tools, including tools for things in OFBiz: doing >>>> it by direct text editing is not that hard, so there just isn't much demand for special tools. >>>> >>>> BTW, I'm talking specifically about things that are NOT static documents. None of the XSL-FO templates in OFBiz are used for >>>> static documents, so in addition to the editor having to understand XSL-FO it also has to understand the dynamic parts of the >>>> document... and that makes the editor a lot more complicated and a lot less useful compared to just editing the files. >>>> >>>> So yes, all of the HTML, CSS, XSL-FO, JavaScript, Java, XML, etc, etc in OFBiz is created by hand (ever since late 2001 >>>> anyway, when we decided that good tool design is a better approach than code generation for poorly designed tools). >>>> >>>> -David >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mar 5, 2009, at 11:00 AM, Sanders, Brian wrote: >>>> >>>>> Tis a commercial product. So, were these files hand coded then? >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[hidden email]] >>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 11:33 AM >>>>> To: [hidden email] >>>>> Subject: Re: *.fo.ftl >>>>> >>>>> Ha yes : xslfast >>>>> >>>>> Jacques >>>>> >>>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >>>>>> AFAIK, there are no free editors but some commercials (Google for >>>>> <<editor "xsf:fo">>) >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacques >>>>>> >>>>>> From: "Sanders, Brian" <[hidden email]> >>>>>> Were these files coded by hand, or was some sort of a WYSIWYG editor >>>>>> used? I need to modify the pack slip and it's a bit of a headache. >>>>> Does >>>>>> anyone know of a decent, free editor/designer I might be able to use? >>>>>> Thanks. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > > |
«
Return to OFBiz - User
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |