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

RE: XSLT vs. CSS (Re: Indexing)

• To: "'Simon St.Laurent'" <simonstl@s...>, 'xml-Dev' <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: XSLT vs. CSS (Re: Indexing)
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 12:30:46 -0500

Yes.  It is the publishing lobster trap:  data goes 
in but does not come out.  The author controls the 
fixed form at publication within reasonable limits. 
One can break PDF (or could, I haven't tried that 
since I mentioned it to Zilles a long time ago) but 
it makes the app fail and that is a really extreme 
means to change a style.

My point here is that arguing for complete author 
control will push one away from XML anyway.  User 
control pushes toward it.  If I am sending XML  
to an XSLT-enabled receiver, my control is pretty 
much zero, so trust.  If I send CSS inlined, I have 
more control but not perfect because it is not 
hard to edit a file or even XSLT it.  If I send it with  
a reference to CSS, I am back to the same problem 
as with XSLT:  trust.  I can't be sure what is in 
the CSS with that name at the receiver.  The only way 
I can send it without having to trust the receiver is to use a 
FFF (final fixed format).

len


From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...]

At 12:10 PM 7/10/2003 -0500, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>As much as I dislike it, the case for PDF keeps
>getting stronger on the authoring side.

I hope you mean that as "publishing side" or something like it - it's not 
much fun to edit or write in PDF directly.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: XSLT vs. CSS (Re: Indexing)
    • From: Dave Pawson <dpawson@n...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XSLT vs. CSS (Re: Indexing)
• Next by Date: Re: Motivations for namespaces (sorry)
• Previous by thread: RE: XSLT vs. CSS (Re: Indexing)
• Next by thread: RE: XSLT vs. CSS (Re: Indexing)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread