RE: [xsl] FOO vs FO

Subject: RE: [xsl] FOO vs FO
From: "Chris Bayes" <chris@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:14:50 +0100

XML/XSL Portal

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> Hewko, Doug
> Sent: 06 September 2001 12:59
> To: 'xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
> Subject: [xsl] FOO vs FO
> Does anyone know why FOO was chosen to mean anything?
> >From the W3 site, in a message at
> "";,
 someone asked "What does mean in CSS?". The response was:
	Ah, a puzzle!

	1. The literal answer is probably not the answer the author is
looking for.

	2. `foo' and `bar' are commonly used as placeholders for
arbitrary character strings.

In XML Bible by E. Harold, page 52, the author says that FOO means
"whatever you want it to". Further down, on page 517, we find that for
formatting objects, the defacto standard prefix is "FO". 

Why was FOO and FO chosen instead of something less confusing? I can
understand FO for formatting objects, but why FOO? Why not XXX or ABC??

 XSL-List info and archive:

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread