Subject: [xsl] re:[xsl] xsl 2.0? From: Wayne Brisette <wbrisett@xxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 07:48:36 -0800 (PST) |
From: Tony Graham <tgraham@xxxxxxxxxx> > It's one of those things where the answer if different for different > people. I've had more approaches for XSL-FO work in the last 18 months > than in any similar period previously, so, yes, it's working for many > people, I suspect (and maybe you can confirm this Tony) that the reason you are seeing an uptick in work is due to companies moving away from the traditional publishing (FrameMaker, MS-Word) and moving more into XML-based authoring environments such as DocBook and DITA. That being said, those of us in that business find ourselves having to reach out more and more to programmers and consultants to do things we use to do ourselves, so there certainly is a level of frustration in our business we haven't had in quite some time. I for one keep looking at more traditional CSS options only because, as mentioned here, finding somebody who has css experience is easier and a lot of times you have that experience within a company. However, with the exception of MadCap's Flare product, which we're not using (not sure what engine they licensed, but it uses CSS) nearly all the PDF publishing systems are using XSLT/XSL-FO for building PDFs. -Wayne
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] get attribute value in gr, henry human | Thread | Re: [xsl] re:[xsl] xsl 2.0?, Tony Graham |
Re: [xsl] xsl 2.0?, Tony Graham | Date | Re: [xsl] get attribute value in gr, Martin Honnen |
Month |