Subject: Re: xsl:fo in web browsers From: "Paul Tchistopolskii" <paul@xxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 1999 10:28:13 -0700 |
> > > > Also, isn't it handy to have just one stylesheet for different media > ? > > > > > > But generally not a good idea. The way you format something for one > media is rarely the way it should be formatted for another. > > > > Very strong sentence. > > Not really. It is one of the most commonly cited benefits of generic markup. OK. I agree that there would be some differences between the stylesheets for different media. To me, stylesheets which are having 95-99% percent in common are 'the same', but maybe you are talking about another percentage? > > I have another point of view after talking to some real-life clients. > > I have been producing dual-media (print and web) for five years and I have > *never* come across a document I would by preference display the same online > as in print. Have you seen http://www.netit.com > For a start, print is paginated. It has headers and footers, page numbers, > tables of contents. > On the web, you either have a scroll or multiple pages and if the latter, > these are broken up generally according to the structure of the document, > not a fixed page size. You have navigation bars to move, not only through > pages, but through the hierarchical structure. I agree, the biggest ( and the only serious ) difference is pagination ( and navigation between pages as a result ). However NetIt copes with that problem. I'm not saying that their solution will work for *any* client. I'm saying that my experience with some real-life clients tells me that developers from NetIt are correct in some of their ideas. > Consider delivery of the same document to a third medium: a PDA. There are > completely different approaches that need to be taken to fonts, pagination > and navigation. What do you mean by 'completely' ? > Now sure, these different stylesheets will have a lot in common and you can > modularise your stylesheets to achieve this. But to produce exactly the same > formatting objects for print, web and PDA is a really bad idea! I agree that in some cases it may be a bad idea. I still think that in some cases it is a good idea. I have no statistics. My feeling is that both cases have comparable niche. Rgds.Paul. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= paul@xxxxxxxxx www.renderx.com www.pault.com XMLTube * Perl/JavaConnector * PerlApplicationServer =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: xsl:fo in web browsers, James Tauber | Thread | Re: xsl:fo in web browsers, James Robertson |
RE: xsl variables, Kay Michael | Date | RE: What will be the future improve, Khun Yee Fung |
Month |