Re: why split? [was RE: XSL intent survey]

Subject: Re: why split? [was RE: XSL intent survey]
From: Chris Maden <crism@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 16:29:21 -0500 (EST)
[Håkon Wium Lie]
> Chris Maden wrote:
>  > The CSS formatting model is good for what it addresses.  It could
>  > be extended for intelligent formatting objects like these, but I
>  > think its fundamental model of kind-of-thing { property: value }
>  > would either make that extension awkward, or would have to be
>  > removed.
> But XSL uses exactly the same model. In XSL the "kind-of-thing" is a
> formatting object, while in CSS the "kind-of-thing" is most often an
> element. It can also be a page, pseudo-class or pseudo-element --
> the first-line pseudo-element in CSS is an example setting style
> based on the layout of the content, not on its structure. The point
> I try to make is that "intelligent" formatting is orthogonal to the
> property/value axis.

The kind-of-thing *isn't* the same.  In CSS, the thing is an element
or pseudo-element.  It has decorations, and it has content that is
either characters or other things-to-be-formatted.

In XSL, the thing is a formatting object, which may have attributes
(analogous to decorations), but which can have complex content.  The
content may be characters, they may be other formatting objects, but
they may also be additional information about the FO, such as
parameters for the formatter to use when performing the final layout.

This is an important distinction.  CSS could introduce additional
pseudo-elements, but it seems silly to break an elegant simple
formatting model instead of using a more complex language for more
complex tasks.

<!ENTITY crism PUBLIC "-//O'Reilly//NONSGML Christopher R. Maden//EN"
"<URL> <TEL>+1.617.499.7487
<USMAIL>90 Sherman Street, Cambridge, MA 02140 USA" NDATA SGML.Geek>

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread