Subject: Re: DSSSL Design Question From: "James Clark" <jjc@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 13:07:30 +0700 |
> From: Vivek Agrawala <vivek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: dssslist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: DSSSL Design Question > Date: Wednesday, June 18, 1997 4:33 AM > > James Clark wrote: > > > > Since you can declare your own characterstics, why aren't they sufficient? > > > > I think it would desirable to allow #f instead of a public identifier in > > declare-characteristic, to mean that this isn't a characteristic that has > > semantics that should be passed to the formatter, but rather it's just being > > used to pass information down. > I like this idea. It would improve the flexibility of DSSSL. > > Can such characteristics be handled completely by the implementation? > With the current Jade, user-defined characteristics require > some modification in the backend(s). At the moment if you declare a characteristic with a public identifier that Jade doesn't know about, you can still use it to pass information down. This is just a convenience to make to clear that you don't intend there to be any formatting semantics associated with the characteristic. > What are the advantages of "First Class Modes" over the > "Not For Formatter Characteristics" ?? You can only use inherited-c inside the specification of a characteristic. It's not legal to do something like: (element p (if (equal? (inherited-foo) 'bar) (make paragraph) (make sequence))) This is because inheritance works on the flow object tree, and outside of a characteristic specification you don't know where you are in the flow object tree. On the other hand there's no such restriction with first class modes. James DSSSList info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: DSSSL Design Question, Vivek Agrawala | Thread | Re: DSSSL Design Question, Vivek Agrawala |
Re: Constructing HTML links in -t s, James Clark | Date | Re: collation, James Clark |
Month |