Re: FO

Subject: Re: FO
From: Carlos Araya <elrond@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 19:16:28 -0700 (PDT)
Mathew:

It's too broad a question to be answered in few words. You need to look
at, at least, two things.

1. XSL-FO is still a working draft. They specifically tell you that they 
will not be constrained by implementations when making changes. It is
also this changing specification that drives the development of FOP so,
as soon as it's possible after a new draft is out, they update FOP to
comply with the new draft... and that will not change until XSL-FO
becomes a standard.

2. Right now there are 3 or 4 different products that support FO one way 
or another. Two of those (Renderx and FOP) work only with HTML, another
one works with TEX... 

The combination of those two factors that make me say... use it but be
aware that it may not be as stable as you'd like for a prodcution
environment.

On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Matthew Bentley wrote:

|Hi guys -
|	How stable do you reckon XSL:fo is at the moment(Ie how much is it
|likely to change over the next year) ?
|
|Matt

--
 p |Carlos E. Araya
 - |WebCT Project Coordinator - New Media Specialist
 G |Alquist Center for Instrucctional Development

email	: araya@xxxxxxxx (prefered)		| Phone (408) 924 2859
Web	: http://valinor.sjsu.edu/~elrond/	| fax 	(408) 924 2439
	  http://www.silverwolf-net.net (under construction)

finger elrond@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for PGP key
-- 
LIFE: You can't control the length, but you can control the depth and
width. -- From Randal Schwartz picture archive


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


Current Thread
  • FO
    • Matthew Bentley - Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:08:51 +1200
      • Carlos Araya - Mon, 31 Jul 2000 19:16:28 -0700 (PDT) <=