Subject: RE: [xsl] XSL stylesheet for XHTML From: "Chris Bayes" <chris@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 23:09:15 -0000 |
Well true but why not? But a *good* presentational thing might be ok for some things. I don't need to know that it was once an H1 if it has <span style="font-size 24pt". I was just musing. If you can go one way then why not the other? Ciao Chris XML/XSL Portal http://www.bayes.co.uk/xml > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > sebastian.rahtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Sent: 22 November 2001 22:44 > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [xsl] XSL stylesheet for XHTML > > > Chris Bayes writes: > > Maybe I'm wrong here but is there something that goes the > other way? It > might be cool to go to fo then reverse it > back to html to produce a html > slide/page thingy sort of > thing. Just a thought. > > but consider the fact that an original <h1>foo</h1> will be > translated to an anonymous <fo:block>, with no means of > knowing its once high and mighty status. even if fo had a > container for this info, its unlikely to be used reliably. > > so you'll not get back *good* HTML from FO. just purely > presentational. that may be ok, but geez, what for? > > Sebastian > > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] XSL stylesheet for XHTML, David Carlisle | Thread | RE: [xsl] XSL stylesheet for XHTML, sebastian . rahtz |
Re: [xsl] XSL stylesheet for XHTML, David Carlisle | Date | Re: [xsl] XSL stylesheet for XHTML, sebastian . rahtz |
Month |