Subject: Re: [xsl] XSL-FO versus PostScript From: Zack Brown <zbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 11:22:46 -0800 |
On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 05:54:22PM -0800, W. Eliot Kimber wrote: > Yes--on the EXSLFO list I've discussed several possible low-cost > solutions to this limitation, Do you mean the FOP-dev list or something else? If something else, can you give subscription information? Google doesn't seem to know about it. Be well, Zack > and an architected solution in the spec > itself is certainly possible. It's also important to keep in mind that > while XSL was designed to support a two-stage generate/paginate process, > it does not require that--there's no reason an FO implementation > couldn't provide a private feedback mechanism in an all-in-one processor. > > My low-cost solution is simply to define a mechanism by which FO > processors can be directed to generate auxiliary, or "side" files, with > page- and marker-specific information that can be fed back into an XSLT > process. This would enable a multi-pass, layout-aware process at minimal > additional cost to FO implementations. > > Cheers, > > Eliot > -- > W. Eliot Kimber, eliot@xxxxxxxxxx > Consultant, ISOGEN International > > 1016 La Posada Dr., Suite 240 > Austin, TX 78752 Phone: 512.656.4139 > > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list > -- Zack Brown XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] XSL-FO versus PostScript, W. Eliot Kimber | Thread | Re: [xsl] XSL-FO versus PostScript, W. Eliot Kimber |
[xsl] Matching in two documents (sa, Marty McKeever | Date | [xsl] Re: Different Namespace Prefi, Dimitre Novatchev |
Month |