[xmlroff] Re: xmlroff-list Digest, Vol 14, Issue 4

[Tony Graham]

On Wed, Jul 09 2008 10:46:33 +0100, phill at theactivitypeople.co.uk wrote:
...
> Are there any performance/memory/feature comparisons available for
> xmlroff and fop?

No.

xmlroff doesn't impinge upon the consciousnesses of the FOP developers
much, if at all: there's more mentions of FOP on this list than there
are mentions of xmlroff on fop-dev.  I don't recall many mentions of
xmlroff at all other than a flurry back in 2002 when xmlroff was first
announced.

FOP's conformance is listed on the FOP website.  xmlroff's conformance
is listed in the xmlroff manual in the distribution.

FOP and xmlroff have different approaches: FOP tries to flush each page
as quickly as possible; xmlroff is still working towards being able to
work on the area tree to get the best result.  (The eventual plan has
always been to have loadable modules to do the tinkering with the area
tree so you can determine your trade-off between tinkering and speed.)

Regards,


Tony.