Re: xsl:fo in web browsers

[James Robertson <jamesr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 03:28 16/09/1999 , Paul Tchistopolskii wrote:

> > > > > 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?

Well, I didn't post the initial comments, but I'll
jump in here.

I've done a fair bit of coding for both the
web and paper, and I can confirm that the formatting
for different media is generally very different.

While a reasonably amount of the overall structure
of the formatting code is "similar", when it comes
down to it, the overlap of stylesheet code between
web and paper is 25-50%, no more.

(This is based on using Omnimark, not XSLT.)

I would never try and use the same code for
different outputs.

(I would also never associate a single
stylesheet directly with an XML file.)

Hope this helps,

J


-------------------------
James Robertson
Step Two Designs Pty Ltd
SGML, XML & HTML Consultancy
http://www.steptwo.com.au/
jamesr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Beyond the Idea"
 ACN 081 019 623


XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list