Subject: Re: [xsl] xsl 2.0? From: Liam R E Quin <liam@xxxxxx> Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 04:21:12 -0400 |
On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 08:15 +0000, G. T. Stresen-Reuter wrote: > Interesting and kind of sorry to hear it. > > On Nov 1, 2013, at 2:45 AM, Liam R E Quin <liam@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > Very small. We were down to three people in Working Group teleconference > > calls, and that was on a good day. > > > > The answer is probably for people to invest in CSS, not XSL-FO, these > > days. > > I use XSL for transforming XML into a variety of other formats > (usually XML but sometimes plain text or CSV). I am guessing you mean XSLT, not XSL-FO. > Why do you say people should be investing in CSS, not XSL-FO? How is > this related to XSL? XSL is in two parts, transformation and formatting. XSLT is the transformation part. XSL-FO is the formatting/styling part. XSLT development is active and continuing. XSL-FO development is less active. Hope this helps, Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] xsl 2.0?, G. T. Stresen-Reuter | Thread | Re: [xsl] xsl 2.0?, Toshihiko Makita |
Re: [xsl] xsl 2.0?, G. T. Stresen-Reuter | Date | Re: [xsl] Nested lists, Michael Kay |
Month |