[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Venting
Hi Guy, <YourComment> CSS is easier than FOs, but the equation in one of CSS+HTML, which even at a simple level I would suggest is not, and if one where to take exception to that I would suggest that expressing pagination in CSS+HTML is not simpler. You're arguements don't even begin to address the needs of our brothers in print design, they wont be impressed by your suggestion that they should use CSS+HTML. </YourComment> <Reply> DSSSL fulfil that niche very well. It has rich output with multiple formats, and, in print you may need to get diverse output like Tex, MIF, etc... On the oter side XSL fulfil needs for the Web. </Reply> <YourComment> Your point d) seems to lead on to suggest that the standards should only follow implimentation, This approach again would kill nearly all the Web standards we have. Also movements like WaSP have been established due to the outrage at the ensuing chaos of implimentation running ahead of standards, hence the nightmare that was HTML 4 + CSS browsers implimentations. </YourComment> <Reply> I do not mean that. I meant that a spec is nothing until concrete implementations reach the market beaches. As long as there is no concrete implementations and usage of these implementations, a spec is nothing (in the market). XSL is so alive today because there is concrete implementations, otherwise it would be an empty space fulfilled with speculations. </Reply> <YourComment> You then return to say 90% of all implimentation are transformative, so that can be taken as the definative decisiion. I would suggest as I have before that this is a rediculous stance to take for a standard not yet complete, aspecially for FOs. Everybody knows that neither MS nor NS will impliment FOs until they're set in stone, as it requires serious reworking of aspects of their browsers. They aren't going to do this while stood on shifting sand, they'd be nuts to. I regard your line of reasoning here as a non-arguement and against all reasonable expectations. </YorComment> <Reply> Guy, I simply took a very pragmatic view. Do you remember the post I made about the time it takes for a new version to reach 90% market penetration? For very pratical reasons, XSL will be used server side and to tranform XML into HTML+CSS. Even _you_ will do that because of pratical reasons. Id you don't, your content won't reach its audience. period. </Reply> <YourComment> On your own practical working practice, I simply respect that that is what you like and percieve to be "a good thing", and I wouldn't seek to knock it at all, we are all entitled to choose our prefered methodologies. </YourComment> <Reply> Its OK About methodolgies, I won't show you anything, you're a professional and you know your job very well. </Reply> YourComment> What I will add by way of expressing my own preferences is that in the work I do I would like to kill HTML stone dead. As a mark-up expression it is now more hinderance than a help. This is evidenced by the fact that I now only use two elements from HTML, predictably, DIV and SPAN, the rest have little bearing to what I'm matking-up. I am by using DIVs and SPANs efffectively creating my own FOs. I would prefer there to be a standard set of FOs..... but this arguement is already well expressed by others elsewhere. </YourComment> <Reply> Guy, let's make a bet and I take people in this list as witnesses. Let's bet that in September (after the august specs release - official date isn't it?) your site use XSL with FO and XML output to be rendered with XSL with FO aware browsers (So use the XSL FOs - client side). Is this OK? So what do you bet? Nevertheless, yes we need to move from actual FOs (HTML+CSS) to something better - but these is legacy - 60 millions people that have to move and believe me, a big mass like that don't move very fast. The Web is actually experimenting what IBM experimented with its customer base and later on what Microsoft is actually experimenting. To move a big customer or user base to new stuff takes time and often more time than we think it takes. </Reply> Regards Didier PH Martin mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.netfolder.com XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
|
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
|