[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: [SUMMARY #1] Why is there little usage of XML on the 'visi
Dave Pawson said: > On Sat, 2006-07-22 at 10:59 -0700, juanrgonzaleza@c... > wrote: > >> GIF, JPEG... [other format] is prefered over XMLs as SVG. > > SVG is XML? "SVG is an application of XML and is compatible with the "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0" Recommendation" [http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/intro.html] > What does your sentence mean? > Who prefers image formats over XML... and for what? People continue using old GIFs and JPEGs and other formats as Flash by several motives. A Trend [http://www.google.com/trends?q=SVG%2C+GIF%2C+JPEG&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all] Next can read some criticism on why the XML hype is going too far. XML is not just good enough for any task: [http://www.xml.com/lpt/a/2000/03/15/deviant/index.html] There is also problems related to presentational features of SVG. Whereas font was considered harmfull for the web (the visible one) and eliminated from last (X)HTMLs, MathML, XSL-FO, and SVG follow the contrary way. I find very interesting next [http://dbaron.org/css/css-vg/] also SVG is more oversized and slow in performance than canvas and there is other stuff. >> Mistake CSS is prefered over XSL-FO. > > Again, by whom? For what purpose? Those Trends can offer you some basic view [http://www.google.com/trends?q=XSL-FO&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all] [http://www.google.com/trends?q=XSL-FO%2C+CSS&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all] And those can offer you some debate [http://www.xml.com/lpt/a/2000/06/21/deviant/index.html] [http://www.xml.com/lpt/a/2005/01/19/print.html] [http://www.biglist.com/lists/xsl-list/archives/199906/msg00349.html] XSL-FO did born for the web, after transformed for off-line usage in printing (in batch mode?) because lacking adequate properties (incremental rendering, author vs client rendering preferences...). Last time CSS begin to be more popular for printing also. [http://www.alistapart.com/articles/boom] with some recent profesional CSS formatters arriving this year, e.g. this one against XSL-FO: [http://www.realobjects.com/News-Article.793+M51571b033ca.0.html] > > >> >> Whow! Then XSL-FO is not for the visible web. > > No. Nor was it meant to be for (this threads definition) of the visible > web. > PDF|ps perhaps is (same context). > > Your arguments aren't making much sense Juan. Hum. It is not clear for what XSL-FO was designed not for what people want (or wait) use it. "While one can hope that Web browsers will one day know how to directly display data marked up with XSL formatting objects, for now an additional step is necessary in which the output document is further transformed into some other format, such as Adobe?s PDF." [http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/bible2/chapters/ch18.html] However the usage of XSL-FO for the web is very harmfull (and contrary to 'safe' web design guidelines) [http://people.opera.com/howcome/1999/foch.html] The own w3c not really explain differences between CSS and XSL for the web. [http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS-vs-XSL#which] When i said XSL-FO vs. PDF and people blamed me by this stupid comparison, i was refering to the hypotetical usage of XSL-FO in browsers (or another window GUI rendering) versus opening and seeing the same document in PDF format online. In fact, i may be not the only see not clear for what XSL-FO was designed... [*] "Just getting a clear definition of XSL-FO can be tricky. There?s no ultimate controversy here, but there are significant differences of perspective and of language when XSL-FO is discussed." "Data Conversion Laboratory, in its Website glossary, writes: 'XSL? is a stylesheet language that gives us the ability to specify how data coded with XML will format on screen (emphasis added). This language was developed based on the ISO companion standard for SGML known as DSSSL?' On screen? What could they possibly mean 'on screen'? That?s not what XSL is about. Or is it? As Deach describes in the cross-media objectives: 'XSL should cover the basic presentation requirements for?a wide range of display devices, including reflow or repagination for palmtop devices, and for the accessibility requirements that are now mandated by many governments.' Therein lays another example of this schizophrenia involving all things XML. Is the prime purpose print, or is it electronic presentation? OK, it?s both. So can one standardized approach really address the cross-media challenge? Or will it meet the same fate as every other product or system that claims to handle crossmedia? Failure. Adobe itself in the latest version of InDesign essentially admits that the cross-media dream had not worked out as previously expected. The cross-media feature of InDesign CS is to bundle up all the print text and graphics and ship them over to GoLive, a Web publishing application. "To give you a little more meat than the above, let me add a couple of quotations from the 1.1 specification that provide context: 'XSL is a language for expressing stylesheets. Given a class of arbitrarily structured XML documents or data files, designers use an XSL stylesheet to express their intentions about how that structured content should be presented; that is, how the source content should be styled, laid out, and paginated onto some presentation medium, such as a window in a Web browser or a hand-held device, or a set of physical pages in a catalog, report, pamphlet, or book.'" [*] McIlroy, Thad. The Gilbane Report 2004, 11(10), 1-14. > >> > -- > Regards, > > Dave Pawson > XSLT + Docbook FAQ > http://www.dpawson.co.uk Juan R. Center for CANONICAL |SCIENCE)
|
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
|