Subject: Re: [xsl] re:[xsl] xsl 2.0? From: "Tony Graham" <tgraham@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 20:39:17 -0000 (GMT) |
On Mon, November 4, 2013 3:48 pm, Wayne Brisette wrote: > 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 I don't always know, since sometimes I'm already busy and it doesn't get beyond the initial approach, but I've also go work from people using JATS. > 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 What technology did you use to 'do ourselves'? I'm afraid you haven't given any details about what your business is. > we haven't had in quite some time. I for one keep looking at more > traditional CSS options only because, as mentioned here, finding Describing CSS as 'traditional' is interesting since a one-time title for September's "Publishing and the Open Web Platform" workshop [1] that you can still see in the <title> is "The New Publishing - A W3C Workshop on the Open Web Platform and the Traditional Print Publishing Industry". > 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. I was interested to see at the Paris workshop how many people were using XSL-FO, though for the ones invited to speak, it really was 'were' in the past tense. What would it take to make XSL-FO easier to use for publishers? Regards, Tony Graham tgraham@xxxxxxxxxx Consultant http://www.mentea.net Mentea 13 Kelly's Bay Beach, Skerries, Co. Dublin, Ireland -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- XML, XSL-FO and XSLT consulting, training and programming Chair, Print and Page Layout Community Group @ W3C [1] http://www.w3.org/2012/12/global-publisher/Overview.html
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
[xsl] re:[xsl] xsl 2.0?, Wayne Brisette | Thread | Re: [xsl] [xsl] xsl 2.0?, Wayne Brissette |
Re: [xsl] When will XSLT 3.0 progre, Liam R E Quin | Date | Re: [xsl] xsl 2.0?, Peter West |
Month |