Subject: Re: [xsl] xsl 2.0? From: Toshihiko Makita <tmakita@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 16:23:36 +0900 |
-- /*-------------------------------------------------- Toshihiko Makita Development Group. Antenna House, Inc. Ina Branch E-Mail tmakita@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 8077-1 Horikita Minamiminowa Vil. Kamiina Co. Nagano Pref. 399-4511 Japan Tel +81-265-76-9300 Fax +81-265-78-1668 Web site: http://www.antenna.co.jp/ http://www.antennahouse.com/ --------------------------------------------------*/
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 04:21:12 -0400 To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From: Liam R E Quin <liam@xxxxxx> Subject: Re: [xsl] xsl 2.0? Message-ID: <1383294072.12526.107.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 08:15 +0000, G. T. Stresen-Reuter wrote:Interesting and kind of sorry to hear it.I am guessing you mean XSLT, not XSL-FO.
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).
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
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] xsl 2.0?, Liam R E Quin | Thread | Re: [xsl] xsl 2.0?, davep |
RE: [xsl] Nested lists, Rick Quatro | Date | Re: [xsl] xsl 2.0?, Kevin Brown |
Month |