Subject: Re: AW: [xsl] XML to PDF (XSL:FO) From: "Andrew Welch" <andrew.j.welch@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:02:59 +0100 |
>> aren't FO specific questions like asking XHTML specific >> questions > > Actually XSL-FO is on topic by definition of XSL List: > > http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list/ > > There is no restriction to what may be posted on the > XSL-List provided it is related to XSL, which is > considered to include XSLT (versions 1 and 2), XPath > (versions 1 and 2) and XSL Formatting Objects (FO). Sure, but really, what does FO have to do with XSLT - other than distant history and similarities in the name? You could argue that XML Schema has a lot more to do with 2.0, so maybe that could be added to the definition... (just making observations, there are only a handful of FO posts each year anyway) -- Andrew Welch http://andrewjwelch.com Kernow: http://kernowforsaxon.sf.net/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: AW: [xsl] XML to PDF (XSL:FO), Florent Georges | Thread | Re: AW: [xsl] XML to PDF (XSL:FO), Florent Georges |
RE: AW: [xsl] XML to PDF (XSL:FO), Michael Kay | Date | Re: AW: [xsl] XML to PDF (XSL:FO), Florent Georges |
Month |