Re: About the style processing instruction

[Matthieu DELAHAYE <delahaym@xxxxxxxx>]

Didier PH Martin wrote:
> 
> Hi Matthieu
> 
> <Comment>
> Don't you think that the best situation you discribe here would be possible
> if each different backend could be define externally.
> I explain: I suppose that we could consider a FO document as a XML document.
> If it is possible to write a XSL ss like "FO document to TeX ocument" which
> translate all FO to a specific backend, thus, any new backend could be added
> to any browser. This need two XSL process "work" (one for PI given by the
> XSL ss author, and one another for the PI about  the FO translation).
> Perhaps I've made a mistake by considering a FO document like a XML
> document, or perhaps this already exist and in this case excuse me. In the
> contrary, this could be a solution.
> 
> <Reply>
> Tell me if I get it right. Your suggestion is that a style sheet may contain
> instructions telling which back end to use or at least require that
> rendering level of quality (the browser provide a rendering in accordance to
> this format rendering model).
> 
> So, we don't specify in the content XML document the media output but in the
> style sheet document. Am I right? Is it what you are saying?
> 

You've find the expression I was searching. In fact, I want to give the
specification of the back end by translating the FOs with specs given
into the XSL ss.
I describe the process:
                                     
              Author ss           Backend specific ss
XML document ----------> FO document  -------> Document   

The "Backend specific ss" would be able, through PIs, to translate FOs
into the media selected.

The selection of the output media would be selected by a second pass
process with a specific XSL ss which correspond to this media.

I hope i'm more clear here.
--
"The only corporate defense against rationality is bureaucracy."
-- anon



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