Re: foo ... bar Re: Q: XML+XSL transforms to a print-ready format

Subject: Re: foo ... bar Re: Q: XML+XSL transforms to a print-ready format
From: "James Tauber" <jtauber@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 16:38:11 -0400
> > Running headings are not exotic. They are very common in books. I would
> > guess that if you picked up two or three books right now, one of them at
> > least would have running headings.
>
> I picked up 10 books, trying to find something that look
> 'not renderable'. There are just different page headers there.
> Each of our 40 testcases at   www.renderx.com  has a
> page header.

Did any of the books have a header that changed with each section? That is
what I mean by running headings/headers. Currently, XSL only lets you vary
headers for each page sequence. That means you can't have a header that
indicates the section where a section doesn't necessarily start on a new
page.

The closest book to me right now (Java in a Nutshell) has running headers
not only indicating sections, but in the case of the API reference at the
back, indicating the class being talked about.

I agree that XML + desired PDF is a good way to specify a requirement.

What I disagree with is that a "typical day-to-day formatter" shouldn't be
able to do running headers. Perhaps we differ on what a "typical day-to-day
formatter" is. I *don't* mean a web browser and I *don't* mean Microsoft
Word (although Word might very well be able to do running headers). I mean
tools that professional publishers use in producing professional
publications.

Running headers should be supported by a typical formatter. XSL doesn't
support them. This is not a criticism of RenderX. It is something missing in
XSL that if not included in 1.0 will have to be added very soon afterwards
if XSL is going to be used in the kinds of production environments that
Sebastian is talking about.

James



 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


Current Thread