Re: Venting

["Rick Ross" <rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with Don on this - there is real value to the FO segment of the
spec, but its use is completely different from the tranformation rules
processing segment. What is the value of the FO segment to someone who is
not implementing a layout or rendering system?

If XSL was split, then those of us implementing everything but the FO would
no longer need to explain that FO is not particularly germane to the
purposes we are trying to serve. It bugs me every time I need to say "AXSL
implements the W3C XSL working draft specification , with the exception of
formatting objects."

Rick Ross
Activated Intelligence

Don Park wrote:
> 
> I second Paul's proposal to split the XSL into two.  Most XSL
> implementations available right now implements the first half but punts on
> the second half for one excuse or another.  This is a good indication of the
> need to split.  I would also add that the separation be not just physical
> but in design as well.
> 
> I would like to invite those of you in favor of splitting XSL into two reply
> to this message as a show of support.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Don Park
> Docuverse
> 
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list

begin:vcard 
n:Ross;Rick
tel;fax:(212) 896-8222
tel;work:(212) 896-8220
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
org:Activated Intelligence
adr:;;100 Park Avenue;New York;NY;10017;US
version:2.1
email;internet:rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
title:President
note:Java Lobby - http://www.javalobby.org
x-mozilla-cpt:;32416
fn:Rick Ross
end:vcard