RE: Error correction (Was also Announcement)

Subject: RE: Error correction (Was also Announcement)
From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:42:01 -0500
Hi Oren,

-------------------------------
Heikki Toivonen <heikki@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> So I would get instead:
>>
>> <?xml-stylesheet href="urn:tns:myscript" type="text/xsl"
>> media="screen, CGM"
>
>I think you are still confusing two concepts here that Chris is trying to
>point out. Let me see if I can help you out.
>
>screen = rendering
>cgm = abstraction (data format)
>dsssl = abstraction (style format, transformation rules format)
>xsl = abstraction (style format, transformation rules format)
>css = abstraction (style format)


I'm not sure what you mean by distinguishing "style format" and "data
format", but I'm pretty certain that XSL as it stands today is
"transformation rules format" + "data format". <fo*> objects seem like a
data format to me.

Reply:
I agree XSL like CSS include a rendering format based on blocks. You are
right Oren (naturally,)

---------------------------------

>So what does the above mean? If you specify media="CGM" or format="CGM" you
>just say that you want to convert the current XML file to the format
>specified in media or format attribute. The new format is still an
>abstraction, not rendering. You can not see, nor hear nor feel a CGM file.
>You need to render it on screen or some other device to actually experience
>it. It does not help if you specify format="tex" -- you still need to
render
>the TeX format before you can experience it, be the rendering on screen, on
>paper or voice. This becomes absurd if you specify format="dsssl". You say
>you convert your document to stylesheet? (But maybe I do not know enough
>about DSSSL or XSL...)


XSL specifies both the transformation rules _and_ the data format of the
results, but forces them to exist under the same name. A "text/xsl" format
makes perfect sense if you mean "convert to a document containing <fo:*>
elements"; as you point out, it makes much less sense to say "convert to an
XSL stylesheet". To make this distinction, however, one would have to
acknowledge that XSL = XTL (transformation) + XFL (formatting)... Nice
example of why this is a technical issue, instead of a political one.

Reply:
I agree, each time politic is there the s... hits the fan. So let's get back
to _real_ technical issues. In fact, technically speaking we have several
rendering models and languages available. And XSL includes also it own
rendering model based on blocks like CSS (But XSL model is not merged yet
with CSS, this is still very immature). However, technically, block may be
insufficient for some type of rendering (like for instance 3D etc...) in
this case, we need a different rendering model. Can we create a unique
rendering model and/or rendering language? maybe, but up to my knowledge I
didn't saw one yet.

Regards
Didier PH Martin
mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.netfolder.com



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


Current Thread