Re: [xsl] alternative to FO?

<-prev [Thread] next->	<-prev [Date] next->
Month Index \| List Home

Re: [xsl] alternative to FO?

Subject: Re: [xsl] alternative to FO?
From: Bruce D'Arcus <bdarcus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:49:01 -0500

On Nov 25, 2004, at 4:25 PM, Jirka Kosek wrote:

It might be option for some users who don't want care about FO or TeX and have not very demanding rendering requirements.

"Not very demanding rendering requirements" in what sense?

It's an innocent question; I don't know FO. I do know that Hans is a demanding typographer, though, and ConTeXt is capable of quite impressive output.

Bruce

Current Thread
[xsl] alternative to FO? Bruce D'Arcus - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:27:57 -0500 Jirka Kosek - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 22:25:04 +0100 Bruce D'Arcus - Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:49:01 -0500 <= Jirka Kosek - Fri, 26 Nov 2004 09:56:43 +0100 <Possible follow-ups> Pawson, David - Fri, 26 Nov 2004 15:08:27 -0000 Michael Kay - Fri, 26 Nov 2004 17:05:16 -0000

<- Previous	Index	Next ->
Re: [xsl] alternative to FO?, Jirka Kosek	Thread	Re: [xsl] alternative to FO?, Jirka Kosek
Re: [xsl] alternative to FO?, Jirka Kosek	Date	[xsl] variables vs. modes, Bruce D'Arcus
	Month