Re: foo ... bar Re: Q: XML+XSL transforms to a print-ready f

>From Paul's last reply to me, I think Paul and I have now phrased things in
such a way that we agree with each other. I suspect we really did all along.

The open issue is the interaction between user requirements, the scope of
the spec and what an implementation actually does. I think this is an issue
that extends well beyond XSL to standards-based development generally.

> The only question for me is now why should not I do it in the
> proprietary way?

Well, you don't have a choice. You *have* to do it a proprietary way because
there is no standard way. Perhaps if you, Sebastian and I implement it the
*same* way it won't be so bad.

James




 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list