RE: About the style processing instruction

["Didier PH Martin" <martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Paul,
[....]

<Reply>
To the first section, I agree. A browser could offer several rendering
methods and render the document accordingly to these rendering methods. The
examples you took about aural, screen and print are right. So an intelligent
browser may take the collection of styles and create a menu (or any
selection device) and offer the end user rendering choices based on this
"media" properties included in the PIs. More particularly a style sheet with
media="print, rtf" or media="print, tex" may, when the user select the print
option either use a rtf or tex apps already installed on the machine to
print the document, download it or bring the user to a place where he can
download one. If the browser is user friendly it can also ask the user if
printing it with the default printing stuff is OK or offer alternative and
even have a agent tell the user the pro-and cons of each options.

What the above mechanism provide is that browsers can, if they don't have
the capabilities themselves, use external device to do so. The document
producer may also specify on what the document may be better experienced.
This, until the ultimate browser that can do everything even your morning
cafe reach the market :-)

<YourComment>
If you really want to specify tex, or rtf, or cgm, then there is nothing
to stop you converting your xml into these formats using whatever
command-line argument, pi or incantation to your favorite processor
uses. You can then put the resulting files on the web. Obviously the less
this happens the better - but it is possible now if you really must use a
particular output format.

<Reply>
Obviously.

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


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