[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Future of XSL-FO at W3C??

• To: "David Carlisle" <davidc@n...>, <bry@i...>
• Subject: Re: Future of XSL-FO at W3C??
• From: "David Rosenborg" <darolst@p...>
• Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 12:06:37 +0200
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• References: <000001c27688$19b61b70$2001a8c0@bryans> <200210180943.KAA27552@p...>

David Carlisle:

> > First off, the fo:block tag is a presentation element in it's own right,
> > just as the p tag is, so the example should be a little more like this
> 
> > fo:block{
> > text-align:right;
> 
> No. Not at all. That is exactlty my point. One should never write an fo
> document, it is only the result of styling some other document. So why
> do you want to re-style it with css?

I think this is the key point, you split the styling in two steps, structure,
and decoration. XSLT is good for the former, CSS for the latter.

But when I think of it, we really don't have to wait for XSL-FO 2 for
this to happen. XSL-FO++ (with CSS) could be handled in a preprocessor
yielding XSL-FO 1.0 as its output.

Cheers,
David

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Future of XSL-FO at W3C??
    • From: "J.Pietschmann" <j3322ptm@y...>
  • Annotation to transformation (was Re: Future of XSL-FO)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • RE: Future of XSL-FO at W3C??
    • From: "bryan" <bry@i...>
  • Re: Future of XSL-FO at W3C??
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Future of XSL-FO at W3C??
• Next by Date: Re: Future of XSL-FO at W3C??
• Previous by thread: Re: Future of XSL-FO at W3C??
• Next by thread: Annotation to transformation (was Re: Future of XSL-FO)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread