Subject: [xsl] "xsl", xslt and xsl-fo [Was: XSL wish list - page column gap/separator line] From: Tony Graham <Tony.Graham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:25:19 +0000 |
On Fri, Feb 12 2010 12:35:45 +0000, davep@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > On 12/02/10 12:10, Andrew Welch wrote: >>>> Is there a reason why it can't be referred to as "XSL-FO" whenever you >>>> mean XSL-FO? In this case, it's as much a case of old habits dying hard. In thinking about this today, it seems to me that the XSL (1.1 and 1.0) Rec is possibly unique in specifying that you *have* to get to the formatting objects by transforming from some other XML. Most specs start by specifying their XML format, and how the XML is created isn't their concern. In XSL 1.1, transformation is mentioned in the second paragraph of the abstract. Though the SVG 1.1 spec talks about arriving at SVG as the result of XSLT [3], it's down in section 6.6, and the XSLT example provided transforms SVG to SVG. You can arrive at FO markup directly, but probably no-one thinks it's a good idea. Using SVG as the file format for a graphics program is fairly common, but if you said your word processor format was FO markup, it wouldn't be a big hit. The idea that you just don't write FO markup ran deep in XSL's DNA. In the DTD for testcases for testing XSL [4], it was at least four months after the DTD was written before it was updated to allow FO files as input instead of having to provide both an XML file and a XSLT stylesheet. (FWIW, I favoured the change.) Formatting objects are still inextricably linked with transformation, whether or not a title or URL says XSL or XSL-FO. ... >> yeah... in my humble opinion, it just causes confusion. "XSL" in the >> wild is nearly always intended to mean "XSLT", anyone who ever wants >> to refer to XSL-FO always uses the "FO" part.... If operating systems favoured four-character extensions on filenames instead of three-character extensions, we probably wouldn't even be having this exchange [1]. >> The announcements titled "XSL 2.0" could easily be called "XSL-FO >> 2.0", then you don't have to explain the history to anyone about the >> distinction between "xsl", xslt and xsl-fo. So that those that *do* know history are condemned to repeat it? > +1. I wonder if the WG can do anything? The official place to give feedback is the W3C public Bugzilla. See http://www.w3.org/XML/2008/01/xsl-fo-bugzilla.html Regards, Tony Graham Tony.Graham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Director W3C XSL FO SG Invited Expert Menteith Consulting Ltd XML Guild member XML, XSL and XSLT consulting, programming and training Registered Office: 13 Kelly's Bay Beach, Skerries, Co. Dublin, Ireland Registered in Ireland - No. 428599 http://www.menteithconsulting.com -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- xmlroff XSL Formatter http://xmlroff.org xslide Emacs mode http://www.menteith.com/wiki/xslide Unicode: A Primer urn:isbn:0-7645-4625-2 [1] Try searching for "htm file" and see how often people use "htm" as a word, e.g., "How to run a script file from a htm page?" [2]. [2] http://www.msfn.org/board/lofiversion/index.php/t54150.html [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-SVG11-20030114/styling.html#StylingWithXSL [4] http://www.w3.org/Style/XSL/TestSuite/tools/testsuite.dtd
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] XSL wish list - page colu, Mario Madunic | Thread | Re: [xsl] "xsl", xslt and xsl-fo [W, Dave Pawson |
Re: [xsl] XSL wish list - page colu, Liam R E Quin | Date | Re: [xsl] XSL wish list - page colu, John Cavalieri |
Month |