Subject: RE: XSL FOs -> PDF using InDesign From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1999 11:19:17 -0400 |
Hi James, James said: ------------------------- Yes, you have caught me out! ;-) Your restating of the choices is certainly more illuminating that my original description. However, what no-one has addressed is that to use the XML->FO->MIF route, you are limited to only those features that are supported by _both_ formats. To be absolutely clear: you cannot use anything in MIF that is not defined in the FO. And you cannot use anything in the FO that cannot be implemented by Frame. I would personally prefer to use a straight transformation tool (XSLT or Omnimark, Perl, etc), and avoid the limitations the FOs may impose. Didier says: --------------------------- James do you have an example of where the actual FOs may be insufficient for a MIF translation? Paul (Prescod), because you already did that in OpenJade(1) but with DSSSL FOs, do you know if there could be some limitations with XSL FOs? My guess is that we would not have less restrictions with XSL FOs than we have with DSSSL FOs. In both case, maybe some problems with fixed positioned FOs :-) but except this common limitation, XSL FOs may cover a lot of MIF constructs. However, Paul can say more than me, he has more knowledge on this kind of translation. Paul, can you give us some light on this? (1) called at that time Jade Cheers Didier PH Martin mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.netfolder.com XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XSL FOs -> PDF using InDesign, Sebastian Rahtz | Thread | Re: XSL FOs -> PDF using InDesign, James Tauber |
Re: XSL FOs -> PDF using InDesign, Sebastian Rahtz | Date | Re: using XSL for Tree View, Cristobal Galiano Fe |
Month |