Subject: Re: [xsl] XSL wish list - page column gap/separator line From: Liam R E Quin <liam@xxxxxx> Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:36:52 -0500 |
On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 11:04 +0000, Andrew Welch wrote: > > The XSL 2.0 requirements document is at http://www.w3.org/TR/xslfo20-req/ > > I've noticed that in the recent announcement emails, and here, that > it's "XSL 2.0" in the title, but then "XSL FO" everywhere else.. > including the url. Even in the abstract is says "This is the > requirements document for XSL-FO and not for XSLT", which would be > obvious if was just called "XSL-FO" all the time.... > > Is there a reason why it can't be referred to as "XSL-FO" whenever you > mean XSL-FO? As Dave Pawson has commented, the name is historical. There's some support within the XSL-FO task force, a subgroup of the XSL Working Group, for renaming it to XSL-FO more formally, but I don't think we've taken the issue up with the XSL Working Group. Personally I agree with you, it's confusing. If XSLT was formally called XSL - Transformations, and XSL-FO was called XSL-Formatting, the relationship would be much clearer, but I think "XSLT" is also rather entrenched. We put the clarification into the requirements because we know people are confused: a requirements document isn't the place to announce a change of name, though, of course. Maybe with XSL-FO 2.0 we should just use a completely different name, like "Hyacinth" or "Rupert"... :-) At any rate it's good to see interest in the spec! Thanks, Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org www.advogato.org
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] History [Was: [xsl] XSL w, Dave Pawson | Thread | Re: [xsl] XSL wish list - page colu, John Cavalieri |
Re: [xsl] History [Was: [xsl] XSL w, Dave Pawson | Date | [xsl] "xsl", xslt and xsl-fo [Was: , Tony Graham |
Month |