Subject: RE: About multiple output documents from a single XML/SGML processed document From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 07:55:07 -0400 |
Hi Dave, Dave said: Yes, that's OK, though I find it less intuitive than the characteristics we have already. If the new file naming mechanism works, why not make use of it, then the characteristic could be from the familiar, break-before: 'file As you describe, but the file name is incremented as you describe. Might be simpler? Didier says: Thanks Dave for reminding me your suggestion. Having the file name+increment could be not so bad after all because at least the file is spited into several output files as with the "scroll" flow object. The problem with this characteristic is that actually it is a Boolean characteristic as found in the paragraph FO. This characteristic has the value #t (true) or #f (false). So, I would have difficulties to include this in the next DSSSL-2 specification drafts. Here are the main constraints we have to face for the next specifications drafts: a) as much as possible characteristics has to be consistent (i.e. their value should be consistent in all objects having the same characteristic) b) A flow object should be as much as possible independent of the output media (some restrictions are relaxed for the document model where we have two different kinds of document model : Simple scrollable page->the scroll object, and page based (the simple-page-sequence and page-sequence). But in both document models, the same flow objects could be applied. For instance, a paragraph object could be used in a scroll document type or in a simple-page-sequence document type (by document type I mean here the output document rendition type). c) New objects or characteristics (i.e. new additions to the existing flow objects) have to be consistent with existing ones. d) The overall DSSSL construct has to be at least compliant to the SGML world (i.e. Hytime, architectures, etc..) e) we may also be compliant to the XML world. For instance, a DSSSL document may also be a XML document as long as it can be a SGML document too. Some other constraints more of political nature :-) Thanks for contributing Dave, you help a lot for the task of preparing the DSSSL future (and more particularly the next specification draft). About the way we can proceed in the OpenJade implementation is that all new objects or characteristic that could be candidate to the next DSSSL-2 specs will be available under the -2 option and won't require the external flow object or characteristic notation. Also, Matthias implemented a new command line option named "strict" that impose the constraint of using only the objects contained in the current DSSSL-1 specifications. People needing "strict" compliance to DSSSL-1 will be served and people wanting to participate to DSSSL-2 experimentions will be served too. For DSSSL-2 we have, the great opportunity to base our reasonning on concrete experience and support our points to the international ISO community with a solid experimental ground. The task to improve DSSSL-1 is a collosal job. Here is what's required: a) Incorporate all specification bug report noticed form the ISO community. b) Assemble all knowledge we gained about the DSSSL-1 usage and synthethize this knowledge and make it "explicit" in documents. c) Assemble comments from the user group and see how their needs could be satisfied with the constraints previously mentionned d) Try something rarely done at ISO or even at W3C, start the process from the user group and work with them the specifications. (we start here a process a lot more democratic than W3C specs process). e) Base our reasonning on the resolution of concrete problems like for example the problem stated by a member of the user group about single input - multiple output. f) do what was missing in the DSSSL-1 effort - make documents and document as much as possible - We have here a real paradox, a document transformation language used by people involved in documents but no documentation (or very little) about our tool. This is again the old story about the shoemaker without shoes :-) I am working hard to correct this (even if my writing style is not as good as shakespeare :-) g) and above all, continue with Avi and Matthias (and hopefully Brandon) to bring new functionalities to OpenJade. As you see, Dave, the task is huge and the people to do it are very few. But we are slowly but surely progressing and doing the job that has to be done. I didn't said that for you Dave, I said all this for the user group so that the group can take for a moment notice of all the task we have to do and that we all do that on a volontary base, just for the love and passion to nurture a language and environement we learned to appreciate. Thanks Dave for you idea, keep thinking and continue to bring new ideas. The OpenJade team appreciate your input. regards Didier PH Martin mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.netfolder.com DSSSList info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: About multiple output documents, DPawson | Thread | RE: About multiple output documents, DPawson |
RE: About multiple output documents, Avi Kivity | Date | RE: About multiple output documents, Didier PH Martin |
Month |