Re: Formatting Objects considered harmful

Subject: Re: Formatting Objects considered harmful
From: James Clark <jjc@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 10:12:53 +0700
Håkon Wium Lie wrote:
> James Clark wrote:
>  > With XSL you also always have the possibility of doing the right thing.
>  > Instead of sending the client a document that uses XSL FOs along with an
>  > XSL stylesheet that does the identity transform, you normally send the
>  > client a semantically meaningful XML document along with an XSL
>  > stylesheet that transforms that into XSL FOs.
> I agree this is a much better model. However, in order for it to
> produce good aural renderings it requires that each document comes
> with an XTL sheet able to transform it into aural formatting objects.
> That's unrealistic.

How is this any different from the situation with CSS?  If I want to get
good aural renderings from an arbitrary XML document using CSS, I'll
have to supply appropriate aural properties in my CSS stylesheet.

This issue here is whether to send (X)HTML or arbitrary XML to the
client. That's a reasonable issue, and I think there are good arguments
for keeping the XML that you send to the client close to HTML, but it's
no basis for the claim that XSL Formatting Objects are harmful.


 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread