Re: Future of XSL-FO at W3C??
Ian Tindale scripsit: > Not convinced. In fact, using your examples, you're in danger of presenting > possibly out of date possibly distributed possibly restored from backup etc. > versions rather than to regenerate the freshest one and only. [strokes chin, > makes tea, wondering if I'm actually right - nah - nobody ever does that with > PostScript unless they're mad or talk to themselves.]. Au contraire. People *do* keep around Postscript all the time -- when you download a technical paper, the chance that it is in Postscript or PDF is pretty close to 100%, unless it comes from the W3C or some such place that has an ax to grind. In any case, people don't always *want* the latest version. Sometimes they want the version that was published (i.e. distributed to the public, not necessarily printed) on January 12, 1999, with not a jot changed. -- John Cowan jcowan@r... "You need a change: try Canada" "You need a change: try China" --fortune cookies opened by a couple that I know
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format