Subject: Re: XSL FO competition From: Sebastian Rahtz <s.rahtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 12:02:48 +0000 (GMT) |
Chris Lilley writes: > Entries should come complete with source code and be freely usable by > others. Entries should take an XSL FO tree (either read in as an xml > document or, if wished, by implementing the XSL transformation part and this would be covered by an "FO to LaTeX" converter, and an appropriate LaTeX style sheet? what is the target? screen? print? `anything in a Web browser'? ie a PDF file? a browser plugin? > reading in the source XML document and the XSL stylesheet). Entries > should output a rendered view of the document, in accordance with the > intent of the XSL stylesheet. With demonstrably better rendering than > CSS2 can produce, the object being to demonstrate that XSL is more > powerful *as a style sheet language*. For example, implementing mixed > vertical and horizontal writing systems. three problems. a) the XSL formatting objects are, so far, too weak to support any interesting formatting which would challenge CSS. unless you can promise the next draft will contain eg math and tables, I cry "foul". b) "demonstrably better rendering than CSS2". to do this, one needs a test document, surely, which exercises interesting formatting features. c) one may be constrained by limitations of the XSL FO's in their draft incarnation. suppose there *are* table FOs, but it turns out they can express no more than HTML tables - then one cannot demonstrate, surely, what the XSL formatter could theoretically do? i am inclined to say that if no-one meets your challenge in a year, then the XSL committee might as well turn the lights out and leave :-} Sebastian XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
XSL FO competition, Chris Lilley | Thread | Re: XSL FO competition, Chris Lilley |
Re: alternating tags in a list?, Guy_Murphy | Date | Re: Is this valid?, Michael . Reinertsen |
Month |