RE: Venting

Subject: RE: Venting
From: Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 17:09:05 +0000
Hi Simon.

You are quite right, I could use XML+CSS, and while it might be a more
accurate expression of my data, it really doesn't get me any further
forward at all in terms of formating that using DIVs/SPANs+CSS... I just
move from relying on DIV as a block element to specifying display: block;

So what one is left with is radical overengineering, ie., having a whole
raft of CSS spec to reinvent the wheel of all your basic FOs... I still
don't see this as an easy option.

I have played with XML+CSS in IE5, and while it's useful with maybe IE5
behaviours for producing "widgets" (I produced a collapsable navigation
menu, from XML data), I'm not overly enamoured at the prospect of complex
rendering using this approach. I appreciate others may differ, but I'm sure
that print designers wont like being told XML+CSS is the solution they
should adopt.


xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 02/11/99 05:18:03 PM

To:   xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc:    (bcc: Guy Murphy/UK/MAID)
Subject:  RE: Venting

At 10:42 AM 2/11/99 +0000, Guy Murphy wrote:
>CSS is easier than FOs, but the equation in one of CSS+HTML, which even at
>a simple level I would suggest is not, and if one where to take exception
>to that I would suggest that expressing pagination in CSS+HTML is not
>simpler. You're arguements don't even begin to address the needs of our
>brothers in print design, they wont be impressed by your suggestion that
>they should use CSS+HTML.
What is this 'equation is one of CSS+HTML'?  You don't need to use HTML
with CSS - you can use it directly with XML, as is done in IE5 and
Netscape's Gecko.  See the CSS2 spec for info on using CSS with XML, or the
MS/NS docs for their browser pre-releases.

Simon St.Laurent
XML: A Primer / Building XML Applications (April)
Sharing Bandwidth / Cookies

 XSL-List info and archive:

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread