Re: [xmlroff] First xmroff php extension test

[Tony G. <Ton...@Su...>]

"Mauro C." <inc...@ya...> writes:
> Hi to all,
>
> IMO with a php extension xmlroff could have more
> audience, maybe someone interested only to use xmlroff
> as black box but a lot of debug on xsl implementation.
>
> I know is more important devel feature.
>
> Some suggestion?
>
> --- Tony Graham <Ton...@Su...> ha scritto: 
>
>> "Mauro C." <inc...@ya...> writes:
>> > I've just finish the first test on a xmlroff php
>> > extension.
>> 
>> I'm impressed.
>> 
>> > I use the xmlroff-libfo sample.
>> 
>> I had always considered that xmlroff-basic.c would
>> be easiest to use when
>> interfacing libfo to something else.  Are you able
>> to say why you chose
>> the example of xmlroff-libfo.c over xmlroff-basic.c?
>
> My first goal i to have something ready in few days :)
>
> Start to hack zend engine (php) and xmlroff tree days
> ago.
>
> Only look libfo high level interface (i'll write my
> opinion on interface later).

That would be useful, since AFAIK very few people have tried it.

...
>> What version of xmlroff did you use?
>
> source pkg:
>
> xmlroff-0.3.8
>
> atk-1.10.3
> cairo-1.0.2
> gdk-pixbuf-0.22.0
> glib-2.9.6
> gtk+-2.8.12
> libgnomeprint-2.8.2
> pango-1.11.5
> pangoxsl-1.6.0.1
> pkgconfig-0.18

atk and gtk+ should not be necessary for xmlroff.

cairo is necessary for the version of Pango that you are using but is not yet
necessary for xmlroff.

> deb pkg:
>
> libart-2.0-2
> libart-2.0-dev
> fontconfig     2.3.1-2

fontconfig is used by Pango, not directly by xmlroff.

Regards,


Tony.