Hi Tim,

I didn't use FOP really (I only tried it and it somehow did seem
unsuitable to me), but I am using iText for quite a while.

I think, iText will work for what you want to do, although a table of
contents is a bit tricky and concerning this, there are some
disadvantages, IIRC (I think, the number of pages reserved for the table
of contents has to be fixed in advance or something like that).

Further disadvantages of iText are:
- No RowSpan for PdfPTables (IIRC, normal Tables can do Rowspan, but
they have some other disadvantages too (Borders?))
- No relative sizes esepcially for images and tables (absolute to
relative widths and heights have to be calculated manually)
- weak support for page breaks / no-page-break

As you see, the disadvantages are only important when you want to do
"advanced" things.

At all, I think, iText is a very good package when you want to generate
PDFs.

Ciao,
Ingo

The TeX or LaTeX systems, available on many Unix systems (I think MikTeX
is Windows) is designed for creating such complex documents.  Knuth
wrote the original TeX so that he could create his classic textbooks.

Ray

Hi Tim,

I've used Apache FOP for doing something similar to what you describe -
producing (shorter) glossy flyers dynamically. My experience suggests that
using XSL:FO allows you to have a much finer-grained control over the layout
and presentation of your PDF output than a tool like iText can provide. Think
things like text leading, kerning, font sizes, colourings, indentation,
page and area margins etc.

Having said that, bear in mind that Apache FOP does not currently implement the
full scope of XSL:FO capabilities (<http://xml.apache.org/fop/compliance.html>
has more details of what the current implementation of FOP does support).
You'll need to decide whether it's missing any key areas of functionality that
you think you'll need for your project. If it is lacking, there are much more
feature-complete commercial XSL:FO engines available, but of course these cost
significant $$$.

Page numbering is very easy with FOP. I haven't created anything more than a
simple table of contents, but they are certainly part of the XSL:FO spec, and
at least some support is implemented in FOP (but beware of memory limitation
issues if you have a large document and lots of forward references, which a
table of contents implicitly requires).

Overall, I was very satisfied with XSL:FO and FOP. Occassionally I had to
creatively work around some limitations, but these were more in the category of
minor hassles than major headaches or showstoppers.

Good luck with the project!

Cheers,
Andrew