If I have some forms in Extensible Forms Description Language (XFDL) format, is there a good way render them as HTML? Someone hasn't been kind enough to create an free XSLT file for doing this transformation, have they? What might my other options me?
There will be a significant amount of work required if you are intending to render in html as well as reproduce any "logic" (via conversion to javascript) that may be inherent in the XFDL form, such as XFDL computes or XPath functions.
There is a product by IBM called Lotus Forms Server that includes a component called Webform Server that renders XFDL in html, yet also runs all of the application logic that may be embedded in the form by making ajax calls back to the server as needed (and occasionally round-tripping if necessary).
Doing it yourself. Sorry, learning XSLT could be an interesting experience and is best left to be done yourself.
Related
I'm processing a variety of RSS feeds, which contain summaries, as well as the target page URL content, and trying to use a uniform transformation method.
XSLT was the first thing that occurred to me to try, as it would accomplish what I want, in a standard way, without a lot of fuss aside from adding new XSLT stylesheets to accommodate uniquely formatted sites and feed content.
Problem: XSLT libraries are considered "private" in iOS, and even linking statically against your own copy will get you rejected by the Apple Store analysis tools.
I've looked into the possibility if injecting the stylesheet and data into a UIWebView that wasn't displayed, but this seems like a really roundabout and hackish way to get at the system's underlying XSLT processor in an "approved" fashion.
What alternative techniques/libraries exist which would let me do this in a standard fashion, ie: without rolling my own.
I'm not sure I fully understand your requirements, but one possbility would be to use libxml (which is allowed in iOS) to parse the XML and if necessary manipulate the DOM. If you really need to do XML transformations this is going to be more effort than XSLT, but if you just need to extract data from the XML, that can be done fairly easily with xpath queries.
That said, I have read several people claiming they got XSLT working on iOS and had their apps approved in the app store. In particular, I've seen this stackoverflow answer claimed as a working solution by multiple people. And if that fails, another answer suggested building the libxslt library yourself with renamed symbols to bypass the app store checks. I would only suggest that as a last resort though.
You'll probably want to look into Hpple for something powerful but light weight / native. See the tutorial on getting started here: http://www.raywenderlich.com/14172/how-to-parse-html-on-ios. Good luck!
I'm going to also recommend TFHpple but I'm also going to elaborate on the solution. I've explored an app that navigates a 3rd party (well, I'm the 3rd party, they're the source but that's semantics) website/data source but there are some pitfalls. The biggest pitfall is obvious: if the data source DOM changes you need to change your app and re-release. A creative way around this would be to publish/expose a global copy of the DOM on a public server that way the end user doesn't have to update their app any time the data source changes (as long as the change isn't radical).
For instance, if your expected DOM search in TFHpple is #"//figure[#class='figure']/a" and then a week from now your data source's resource you're looking for is altered to #"//figure1[#class='figure1']/a" you just opened yourself to an App Store release... UNLESS... you publish the expected DOM searches on a web server you control in a data dictionary that your app can consume and serve out to the various DOM search elements within your app. The only problem I foresee here is that if the data source adds or removes a data element you want to consume you either have to release a build or handle the removal ahead of time (respectively).
Lastly if the data source DOM isn't well formed or consistent you may be beating your head against a wall more times than not.
I'm working on automating our company invoicing system. Currently all data is stored in our local MySQL database and someone manually updates an excel spreadsheet and then merges this data into a MS Word template. The goal is to automate this process so that the invoice can be generated from our intranet website as a PDF.
My original plan was to create a template in HTML/CSS and use wkhtmltopdf to generate the PDF but I ran into problems with getting a repeatable header and footer on each page. thead and tfoot aren't supported by Webkit and the fix suggested in this other question does not seem to work either.
So I then stumbled on using XML and XSL-FO, the latter I know nothing about. Is this the best path to take? Are there any libraries or utilities out there that will make converting my HTML+CSS into XML+XSL-FO easier? Are there any other alternatives I'm overlooking?
EDIT
Currently the server is CentOS Linux with a MySQL database. All other code is currently in PHP currently but that may change as the whole system is being revamped. Linux and MySQL will almost certainly remain, though.
For your requirement, XSL-FO might just do the trick. It is much cleaner to produce the pdf's directly from the data, then going the cumbersome html path, unless you need to display the html as well, then you might consider converting from html to pdf, but it will always be messy.
You can get xml results from mysql quite easily (mysql --xml) and then you write one (or several) xsl-fo stylesheet for the data. then, you cannot only produce pdfs, but also postscript files or rtf's with some processors.
XSL-FO has its limitations tho, but for your situation, it should suffice.
I admit, the learning curve can be steep, and maintaining xslt-stylesheets can get very tiring, but as you start knowing more about it, you end up writing less code.
another possibility is to do the whole thing in e.g. java or c# - send select statements and loop the results and iteratively build the pdf using a library like iText.
You could try JODReports or Docmosis as less-code intensive options. You supply Word or OpenOffice Writer documents to act as templates and use these engines to manipulate/populate the templates then spit out the documents in the format(s) you require. This may mean your existing Word-templates can be used directly which should save you some effort/time.
iText is another library that will let you build and pump out PDFs from code. It's pretty good.
If you cloud use ASP.NET for web you can use free ReportViewer library and designer for automated of publishing PDF-s.
Here is some references:
http://gotreportviewer.com
http://weblogs.asp.net/srkirkland/archive/2007/10/29/exporting-a-sql-server-reporting-services-2005-report-directly-to-pdf-or-excel.aspx
If you're OK using .NET and C#, you could use DotPdf from Atalasoft (obligatory disclaimer: I work for Atalasoft and wrote most of DotPdf). The Generating namespace is geared for exactly what you're trying to do: automate report generation. From the very basics, you could just create docs directly with the toolkit or you can create template documents that have unpopulated text fields that you can reload and fill later (see here and here for examples).
I just learned about XLST on stackoverflow today (I love how in computers you can program for years and constantly have 'darn, how did I not know about that technology' moments). I'm wondering how popular XLST it is for web development? I've worked on a few websites (using php, ruby, and asp.net mvc) but I'm not a web developer by any means.
Is the reason each web language I listed above has it's own way of marking up html (and thus taking advantage of 'templates') just to make it simpler (simpler as in more to the point and not and more geared to one specific purpose) in that you don't have to first convert what you want to display to xml and then to html? Or are there other reasons why XLST doesn't seem too popular for web development? Or am I just crazy (again most of my work is with Desktop apps) and actually it is widely used in webpages? If not in development, what do you mainly use it for?
It seems that being able to easily serialize objects in xml with C# would make XLST a very popular way of displaying object in HTML on websites?
Thanks for feeding my curiosity!!
IMHO there are two main reasons why XSLT is not very popular:
it's generally hard.
you can just skip it and directly write HTML, and HTML is not hard and has first-class support from all web frameworks.
In summary, there is usually not enough reason to introduce yet-another-abstraction. Abstractions are not free, they solve some problems but introduce others (i.e. the "solve it by adding another layer of indirection" adagio), so the benefits must clearly outweight the costs.
That said, there are XSLT-based solutions for many web frameworks, e.g.:
ASP.NET MVC XSLT view engine
libxslt in RoR
Here's an excellent article that discusses XSLT for view engines.
As I've started so many answers on Stackoverflow, it depends :)
Doing what you're describing is adding another layer of abstraction between application logic and the display output; and introducing another language. There can be very compelling reasons to do this, but the important part to keep in mind is that you need to recognize and quantify the need to be able to understand whether it's worth it.
It seems that being able to easily...
As with most things in software development, something that seems easy after a few hours of pondering turns out to be quite complex and involved when you actually try to do it. This is especially true here, because I have built exactly what you're describing in ASP.NET. It provides a very interesting mechanism for skinning sites, as you simply have to define your model XML schemas and anyone can write an XSLT to transform it. But XSLT is like a one-way tunnel. It can't (easily) reach back out or to the sides to pull in extra info that wasn't included in the original model - "peripheral data", so to speak. In fact, it has a hard time really being aware of what's going on in the application at all.
Also, XSLT is very verbose, and (in many ways) a crude language. This makes it... unpleasant to do things like loops, and rather time consuming to even do something like an if-else statement*. An XSLT that generated something like, say, the page you're looking out right now would probably be several thousand lines long - which you're adding on top of the application code you have to write either way.
It is simply an additional cost which may or may not be worth it, depending on what you're trying to accomplish.
*For example, I once saw a developer try to write a pager control (e.g. "first | prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next | last") in XSLT. We still visit her in the sanitarium from time to time.
XSLT is not popular in web frameworks because XML is not popular in web frameworks. But, if you have XML data, or you are willing to convert your objects to XML then XSLT is the best tool for transforming that XML into HTML or XHTML.
If you are using ASP.NET checkout myxsl
When I first discovered XSLT I was excited because I could write semantically correct presentation markup, and I would no longer have to write so many hacks and use so many nested layers of <divs> just to get the effect I wanted -- XSLT could do all that for me!
Then I realized XSLT was a weird, backwards, and painful language to write in. I believe other web developers have discovered the same thing and steered away from it.
What's the point when you can just write straight HTML and avoid an extra layer of abstraction? And if your application is complex enough to warrant that, then there are so many better, simpler, more powerful alternatives (other templating languages).
The design of a web page is often handed over to designers.
One thing about web designers is they know HTML (if you're lucky) but they're not going to know XSLT.
It's unpleasant to do loops and if-else-statements in XSLT like it's unpleasant to hammer with a screwdriver. Don't do that. The behaviour of an XSLT script is driven by the data, you only need to find the right matches for your templates. XSLT-templates are not just a piece of code. The actual data from the XML-file fitting in the "match"-attribute of the "template"-elements decide if and when to execute a template.
Once you discover that XSLT works different to other languages you see the possibilities this gives to you. It's easy to do things that are hard to do in usual languages. Just use it when appropriate. If your data comes as XML and you know XSLT and XPath, this is the right tool to build web pages.
Hints are available at e.g. jenitennison.com/xslt.
Note: I realize this question has already been asked (with a ruby slant) here: Creating on-demand, print-quality PDFs (preferably in Ruby if feasible). BUT there was no decent answer IMHO.
So as you may have guessed, I am looking to find the best approach to producing HIGH QUALITY, print ready PDF documents programmatically. Our requirements need us to be able to have design documents that define place holders for dynamic content like images and text i.e. some kind of template mechanism.
The suggestion has been to use Adobe's InDesign server, but this seems like an expensive solution not to mention a little overkill for our need.
Are there any alternative, cheaper and more fitting solutions out there? The language of the solution doesn't really matter, just as long as it can be executes on a Windows box.
My suggestion would be to look at XSL-FO or thereabouts...
You create an XML doc that describes what you want and there are various libraries and toolkits (I've used XEP from RenderX) that will convert said XML into PDF.
In real terms what we did was take a large lump of data in XML format, use XSLT - templates in effect - to convert the data to formating objects which XEP renders up into something (a 500 page hotel directory with auto-generated TOC and Index) that has been consumed quite happily by at least three different commercial printers. We did some other smaller documents too from time to time.
Downside with this is that its not even remotely a WYSIWYG solution - you're effectively compiling "source code" to get PDF out the back. Upside is that the base technologies are reasonably generic even if the specific toolkits may be a bit less so.
You can convert XML templates to PDFs with Prince.
Prince is a computer program that
converts XML and HTML into PDF
documents. Prince can read many XML
formats, including XHTML and SVG.
Prince formats documents according to
style sheets written in CSS.
I have and also know many people that have had much success with ReportLab an open source Python PDF library (http://www.reportlab.org/rl_toolkit.html).
Its extremely easy to use and very quick to get started. So worth trying out.
I don't know why no one has suggested using LaTeX for this. It's an extremely popular open format for document design and not hard to set up a template that you can fill in text or image content. While the reference implementation of LaTeX runs as a standalone program, if that sounds like too many moving parts for you there are wrapper libraries for Python and other languages you can call via an API.
Java language and JasperReports
Java: iText
C#: iTextSharp
depends on what you want to publish, but take a look at Pentaho reporting
http://reporting.pentaho.org/
rinohtype is an open-source document processor that is capable of producing high-quality print-ready PDF documents. You can use one of the built-in document templates (book, article) or define your own template. The look of document elements can be configured by means of CSS-like style sheets. The contents of your document can be parsed from reStructuredText or CommonMark files, or you can build the document tree programmatically.
Full disclosure: I am the author of rinohtype.
Is it possible to reuse HTML tags across multiple files, headers and footers for example? Placing them in separate files adds an extra HTTP request, that I'd like to avoid.
I don't want to replicate minor changes in headers and footers across every html file every time a change request comes along.
HTML is not a programming language - it's a markup language. You don't do object-oriented HTML because it isn't object based. This is the whole purpose of a server-side language, so you can make include files and use them in your server-side application.
If you have Apache however, you can use server-side includes which don't require a programming language such as PHP, but it's less flexible:
<!--#include virtual="/footer.html" -->
First, HTML isn't even a programming language, so it's impossible to have "Object-oriented" HTML.
Placing them in separate files adds an
extra HTTP request, that I'd like to
avoid.
If this is the reason for your "without server side code" requirement, then you are mistaken - the client does not fetch the templates that make up a page separately; the server side code will return a single HTML page to the client.
If, on the other hand, you don't have the option to run any server-side code at all and have to make do with static HTML pages, then there's only two options I can think of: iframes (which do result in separate HTTP requests, of course), or some sort of tool that basically runs the equivalent of server-side code to embed your reused templates everywhere and spits out the result to be uploaded to the server. You can have this effect by running a PHP/Apache-with-SSI/JSP/Whatever server on your development machine and using wget to make a static snapshot of the pages.
What I want to do is this. The files can be scattered during development. But I when I'm ready to release, a toolkit should compile the included files into a single html file.
You can use a template language/engine, such as jinja2.
You can layout files in a certain hierarchy, and have templates inherit from other templates, and include other templates, and define reusable macros (closest thing to what you referred to as "reusable tags").
What I want to do is this. The files can be scattered during development. But I when I'm ready to release, a toolkit should compile the included files into a single html file
I know this is late, but CodeKit's .kit language lets you do exactly what you were saying.
http://incident57.com/codekit/help.php
I think the language you've chosen in your question (object oriented HTML) is actually masking the real issue you have here...
What I want to do is this. The files can be scattered during development. But I when I'm ready to release, a toolkit should compile the included files into a single html file.
This sounds like a job for a preprocessor, I don't believe it has anything to do with your webserver or server side technology, as this is a step which would happen before deployment.
There's a number of text pre-processors available eg M4 - hell you could even use the C compiler pre-processor if you wanted. A quick google reveals that there are specialised pre-processors for HTML as well....
Automatic file inclusion, automatic escaping, and whatnot that can be done with automatically inserted headers and footers, chosen based on path patterns.
Seems to fit the bill?
Sure . But these would have to be separate ajax calls form the client . There are lot of javascript mvc frameworks like that do that .
If you want to have include files during development, then compile them into free-standing HTML files, you could do that by spidering your development server with wget: whatever server-side technology you use will combine the files and return the HTML, which wget will saves as one file.
As everithing is object over the technology but not directly, indirectly interacting with the object that are created at different level as per security implementation.
You can do this.
I just released a mature framework called Hypertag that is, in fact, Object Oriented HTML. It is entirely client-side, in continuous development, and allows for very interesting, yet HTML-compatible, advanced solutions for logic and layout.
See http://hypertag.io for more.