Andrew--
I share your annoyance/concern.
I think the schizophrenia involved with the committee's terminology comes
from the days when XSL encompassed both -T and -FO in one standard. They
were later broken into two separate standard proposals.
Now that they're separate, the simple fact is that XSLT is getting most of
the attention and press, and -FO tends to be forgotten in the "real world".
But, yes, I can't help but second your proposal for more accuracy in the
standards documents themselves.
Cheers!
Chris Ryland * Em Software, Inc. * www.emsoftware.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <AndrewWatt2001@...>
To: <XSL-FO@egroups.com>
Cc: <xsl-editors@...>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 12:43 PM
Subject: [XSL-FO] A need for consistency and precision when referring to
"XSL"
> Robert & others,
>
> The issue addressed in this post may go some way to help some list members
> understand why they are having problems understanding parts of the "XSL"
> Candidate Recommendation, which in my view would be better termed as the
> "XSL-FO" CR.
>
> What follows is a slight re-edit of a past post on another list.
>
> ***Re-edited quote begins***
>
> This post is a plea for a beginning in consistent use of the term "XSL" in
> W3C documents. The current CR stage of XSL-FO and the first WD of XSLT 1.1
> give an opportunity to W3C to remove longstanding inconsistent usage and
to
> introduce coherence and consistency.
>
> For those who have not yet considered the problem let me summarise the
> difficulty and inconsistency by the use of two "equations" which summarise
> two mutually contradictory positions about what "XSL" is which are taken
> (implicitly or explicitly) in the current versions of W3C documents.
>
> To avoid ambiguity I use the term "XSLT" to indicate XSL Transformations
and
> the term "XSL-FO" to indicate XSL Formatting Objects.
>
> The two equations are:
> 1. XSL = XSLT + XSL-FO (see e.g. Abstract of XSL-FO CR)
> 2. XSL = XSL-FO
>
> Stated as baldly as this I expect to potentially elicit howls of protest
> along the lines
> of "Of course XSL is the summation of XSLT and XSL-FO". But the statements
> currently present in various W3C documents contradict this assumed clarity
> and consistency.
>
> Let me illustrate. .... In the XSLT 1.0 Recommendation of November 1999 it
is
> stated in the Abstract, "XSLT is also designed to be used independently of
> XSL.", a statement which cannot be true if XSL = XSL-FO + XSLT (XSLT
cannot
> be used independently of "XSL" since XSLT is _part of_ "XSL") and
> contradicts, for example, the Abstract of the XSL-FO CR. However the
> statement also
> contradicts the position taken earlier in the Abstract of XSLT 1.0: "In
> addition to XSLT, XSL includes ....". So, XSLT seems to be "included in"
XSL
> but
> is also can be used "independent of" it. Something doesn't add up. What is
> happening is that the first part of the preceding sentence refers
implicitly
> to equation 1. and the latter part to equation 2.
>
> Thus, in theXSLT 1.0 Recommendation (and repeated verbatim in the XSLT 1.1
> WD) we have the use of both "equations". Which equation is true? Does XSL
=
> XSL-FO + XSLT or is XSL = XSL-FO? XSLT 1.0 effectively uses these two
mutually
> contradictory positions within a few lines of each other.
>
> The same inconsistency also appears in the current XSL-FO CR. As mentioned
> above the Abstract indicates unequivocally that XSL includes both XSLT and
> XSL-FO. But in Section 2, confusingly labelled "Introduction to XSL
> Transformations" it is stated, "The XSL namespace has the URI
> http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Format.". The placement of a statement about
what
> I would call the XSL-FO namespace in a section on XSLT is confusing
enough.
> But if, as the Abstract of the CR implicitly states, XSL = XSL-FO + XSLT
then
> there are two "XSL" namespaces viz. http:www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Format AND
> http://www.w3.org/XSL/Transform, not one as the XSL-FO CR states.
>
> There are many ways of slicing up these inconsistencies but, in my view,
they
> are founded in the use of "XSL" in the same documents to have two distinct
> meanings. Is "XSL" the same as "XSL-FO + XSLT"? Or is "XSL" the same as
> "XSL-FO"?
>
> I would suggest that the W3C "XSL" editors ... by which I mean the editors
> for the XSL-FO CR and the new XSLT 1.1 WD need to decide what "XSL" is and
> then use the term precisely and consistently. At present neither precision
> nor consistency is achieved.
>
> I hope these two examples serve to illustrate the ambiguity or
inconsistency
> of the use of the term "XSL" in current W3C documents. I could, quite
> possibly, go on at length about how the inconsistency plays out in various
> W3C documents. Rather, I think it is more important to find a solution
that
> is logical, clear and consistent.
>
> Suffice to say that the inconsistency within XSL/XSL-FO/XSLT specs plays
out
> to some degree in other specs too.
>
> My suggestion for how to move toward coherence would be:
>
> 1. Confine the generic term "XSL" to situations which refer to XSLFO _and_
> XSLT collectively.
> 2. When referring to XSL Formatting Objects the abbreviation to be used
> should be either "XSL-FO" or "XSLFO".
> 3. When referring to XSL Transformations the abbreviation used should be
> "XSL-T" or "XSLT".
> 4. It should be recognised that there are two "XSL Namespaces". The XSLT
> Namespace has a namespace URI of http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform. The
> XSL-FO Namespace has a namespace URI of http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Format.
> 5. The confusing "indicative prefix" (my term) for those two namespaces
> should be corrected/made consistent. I would suggest that the XSLT
namespace
> use the "indicative prefix" of "xslt" rather than "xsl" i.e. as an
example,
> the present
> <xsl:stylesheet> element would become <xslt:stylesheet>. Similarly the
"fo"
> indicative prefix would become "xslfo" i.e. <fo:root> would become
> <xslfo:root>.
>
> I would propose that the W3C Core XML Group (do I have the terminology
> correct?) review the current inconsistency in terminology across W3C specs
> currently in draft or under revision and give clear, unambiguous guidance
on
> which meaning "XSL" has in W3C documents.
>
> <side_issue>
> [ With regard to the more specific problem relating to the naming of the
> current XSL-FO CR could that not be called the "Extensible Stylesheet
> Language Formatting Objects, XSL-FO" Recommendation in due time? And could
> another very short "XSL" REC indicate that XSL version 1.0 subsumes the
XSLT
> REC of November 1999 and the XSL-FO REC, currently at CR stage? Then when
> XSLT 1.1 is finalised "XSL 1.1" could be defined as "XSL-FO 1.0" plus
"XSLT
> 1.1"? Just a thought. :) ]
> </side_issue>
>
> Consistent usage of the term "XSL" is desirable. With the current fluidity
of
> a XSL-FO CR and an XSLT 1.1 WD there is an early opportunity for W3C to
> introduce consistency where hitherto inconsistent and confusing usage of
the
> term "XSL" has been rather too visible.
>
> *** Re-edited quote ends ***
>
> Returning to Robert's question about the "fo" namespace and the confusion
> that that term caused him - If my suggestions were adopted we would refer
to
> that as the XSL-FO namespace with, in my view, much less ambiguity than a
> supposed but essentially spurious "XSL namespace".
>
> Sorry, to those for which this is pretty hard going. You need to be fairly
> familiar with how the specs use the terms to see that there is a problem.
And
> perhaps more familiar to diagnose it and suggest a (hopefully coherent)
> remedy.
>
> I hope that the XSL-editors wil prove responsive to these suggestions. It
> would make teaching some parts of XSL/XSL-FO/XSLT to relative beginners
just
> a little bit easier if the "standard" terms were used consistently in the
> definitive documents.
>
> Andrew Watt
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
--- In XSL-FO@egroups.com, "Nick Ridout" <costempd@u...> wrote:
> Does this list have a "digest" subscription option?
>
> Nick Ridout
Nick,
Yes it does.
I assume you subscribed using the email address?
You need to login to eGroups.
To login you need your email address you subscribed from and a
password. If you joined the list using only an email subscription
request you won't know how to login.
So try to login on www.egroups.com. Somewhere there is an option for
when you have "forgotten password". EGroups will send you a number
that is the key to creating a new password.
After all that .. you can login.
I think you will find yourself on the MyGroups page. Beside the name
of this list there is a drop down menu. One of the options is Daily
Digest.
It takes longer to describe than to do.
Good luck
Andrew Watt
As some recipients will know I am interested both in how SVG will work with
XSL-FO and how SVG will work with XForms.
What is causing me severe brain ache today is trying to get my mind round how
XForms and XSL-FO might work together.
Have any recipients of this email given any thought to that? Got any
prototype working code?
Perhaps I am suffering from incipient "Old Timer's Disease" ... :) ... but I
am having trouble seeing how it will all work. And what it will DO or be used
for. So if anyone is further on in that thinking I would appreciate insights
which will lead me to the "Ah NOW I see" stage.
I can see that, in principle, it is "just" a multi-namespace XML document.
But feel there is potential there, in terms of usage, that I am not seeing
yet. It feels as if something exciting is there but is just out of reach at
the moment. I hope that makes some sense and doesn't sound like, totally,
like the ramblings of a blithering idiot.
Responses on or off list would be welcome.
Andrew Watt
This post is largely by way of possibly bringing separate groups of
developers together.
SVG developers may, in the main, not yet be up to speed on the potential
implications of the XForms proposal at W3C. SVG developers who are interested
in this will find information at
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/
The current XForms Working Draft, explicitly recognises that XForms will be
embedded within SVG documents (among other XML document types). XForms could
provide powerful and useful interactivity in SVG-based documents or web sites.
XForms developers may be interested to know that there is a working prototype
SVG-only web site accessible at
http://www.svgspider.com/default.svg
There are specific technical issues about accessing SVG-only web sites at
present. Instructions are given at the end of the email.
XForms developers / software companies who are looking for a test bed to test
XForms prototypes in a working SVG web site such as www.svgspider.com may
contact me at the email address from which this email was sent.
I hope that those interested in creatively combining these cutting edge
technologies can interact and move forward to realise the synergy which,
together, XForms and SVG can provide.
Andrew Watt
Instructions:
To access www.SVGSpider.com/default.svg
you will need the Adobe SVG Viewer version 1. The site is designed at present
to work primarily with that version.
It may be downloaded at www.adobe.com/svg/
At present version 2 of the Adobe Viewer is in beta. Once Version 2 is
released I will update the SVGSpider.com web site to accomodate the
differences in handling of XLinks between SVG Viewer versions 1 and 2.
Internet Explorer 5.5 works well with the site. A few problems arise with
Netscape. If using Netscape 6 the Adobe Viewer does not automatically plugin.
It is NOT possible to access the site using the URL www.svgspider.com
The XLink implementation in SVG Viewer Version 1 causes an error in IE5.5
Andrew,
I have to say that you have hit the nail firmly on the head and
Chris's observation is most likely the cause of the problem....
I think you proposal is right on the mark ....but of course the real
world maybe harsh on this suggestion ......it would break a lot of
code ...better to break early than late......
suggestion.....
maybe just correct the spec and live the namespace alone....I'm not a
fan of this suggestion...but it would make it sooooo much easier to
teach others......believe it or not some of use the spec to teach
others.......watch out for the sentence in the "xsl-fo spec" :-) were
it states that it is not tutorial in nature:
"This document is intended for implementors of such XSL
processors. Although it can be used as a reference manual for writers
of XSL style sheets, it is not tutorial in nature" I think that your
logic about the miss use of the term "XSL" would still
stand.....Implementors need to understand to......
good job of stating this problem......
Robert A. DiBlasi
--- In XSL-FO@egroups.com, "Chris Ryland" <cpr@e...> wrote:
> Andrew--
>
> I share your annoyance/concern.
>
> I think the schizophrenia involved with the committee's terminology
comes
> from the days when XSL encompassed both -T and -FO in one standard.
They
> were later broken into two separate standard proposals.
>
> Now that they're separate, the simple fact is that XSLT is getting
most of
> the attention and press, and -FO tends to be forgotten in the "real
world".
>
> But, yes, I can't help but second your proposal for more accuracy
in the
> standards documents themselves.
>
> Cheers!
> Chris Ryland * Em Software, Inc. * www.emsoftware.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <AndrewWatt2001@a...>
> To: <XSL-FO@egroups.com>
> Cc: <xsl-editors@w...>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 12:43 PM
> Subject: [XSL-FO] A need for consistency and precision when
referring to
> "XSL"
>
>
> > Robert & others,
> >
> > The issue addressed in this post may go some way to help some
list members
> > understand why they are having problems understanding parts of
the "XSL"
> > Candidate Recommendation, which in my view would be better termed
as the
> > "XSL-FO" CR.
> >
> > What follows is a slight re-edit of a past post on another list.
> >
> > ***Re-edited quote begins***
> >
> > This post is a plea for a beginning in consistent use of the
term "XSL" in
> > W3C documents. The current CR stage of XSL-FO and the first WD of
XSLT 1.1
> > give an opportunity to W3C to remove longstanding inconsistent
usage and
> to
> > introduce coherence and consistency.
> >
> > For those who have not yet considered the problem let me
summarise the
> > difficulty and inconsistency by the use of two "equations" which
summarise
> > two mutually contradictory positions about what "XSL" is which
are taken
> > (implicitly or explicitly) in the current versions of W3C
documents.
> >
> > To avoid ambiguity I use the term "XSLT" to indicate XSL
Transformations
> and
> > the term "XSL-FO" to indicate XSL Formatting Objects.
> >
> > The two equations are:
> > 1. XSL = XSLT + XSL-FO (see e.g. Abstract of XSL-FO CR)
> > 2. XSL = XSL-FO
> >
> > Stated as baldly as this I expect to potentially elicit howls of
protest
> > along the lines
> > of "Of course XSL is the summation of XSLT and XSL-FO". But the
statements
> > currently present in various W3C documents contradict this
assumed clarity
> > and consistency.
> >
> > Let me illustrate. .... In the XSLT 1.0 Recommendation of
November 1999 it
> is
> > stated in the Abstract, "XSLT is also designed to be used
independently of
> > XSL.", a statement which cannot be true if XSL = XSL-FO + XSLT
(XSLT
> cannot
> > be used independently of "XSL" since XSLT is _part of_ "XSL") and
> > contradicts, for example, the Abstract of the XSL-FO CR. However
the
> > statement also
> > contradicts the position taken earlier in the Abstract of XSLT
1.0: "In
> > addition to XSLT, XSL includes ....". So, XSLT seems to
be "included in"
> XSL
> > but
> > is also can be used "independent of" it. Something doesn't add
up. What is
> > happening is that the first part of the preceding sentence refers
> implicitly
> > to equation 1. and the latter part to equation 2.
> >
> > Thus, in theXSLT 1.0 Recommendation (and repeated verbatim in the
XSLT 1.1
> > WD) we have the use of both "equations". Which equation is true?
Does XSL
> =
> > XSL-FO + XSLT or is XSL = XSL-FO? XSLT 1.0 effectively uses these
two
> mutually
> > contradictory positions within a few lines of each other.
> >
> > The same inconsistency also appears in the current XSL-FO CR. As
mentioned
> > above the Abstract indicates unequivocally that XSL includes both
XSLT and
> > XSL-FO. But in Section 2, confusingly labelled "Introduction to
XSL
> > Transformations" it is stated, "The XSL namespace has the URI
> > http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Format.". The placement of a statement
about
> what
> > I would call the XSL-FO namespace in a section on XSLT is
confusing
> enough.
> > But if, as the Abstract of the CR implicitly states, XSL = XSL-FO
+ XSLT
> then
> > there are two "XSL" namespaces viz.
http:www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Format AND
> > http://www.w3.org/XSL/Transform, not one as the XSL-FO CR states.
> >
> > There are many ways of slicing up these inconsistencies but, in
my view,
> they
> > are founded in the use of "XSL" in the same documents to have two
distinct
> > meanings. Is "XSL" the same as "XSL-FO + XSLT"? Or is "XSL" the
same as
> > "XSL-FO"?
> >
> > I would suggest that the W3C "XSL" editors ... by which I mean
the editors
> > for the XSL-FO CR and the new XSLT 1.1 WD need to decide
what "XSL" is and
> > then use the term precisely and consistently. At present neither
precision
> > nor consistency is achieved.
> >
> > I hope these two examples serve to illustrate the ambiguity or
> inconsistency
> > of the use of the term "XSL" in current W3C documents. I could,
quite
> > possibly, go on at length about how the inconsistency plays out
in various
> > W3C documents. Rather, I think it is more important to find a
solution
> that
> > is logical, clear and consistent.
> >
> > Suffice to say that the inconsistency within XSL/XSL-FO/XSLT
specs plays
> out
> > to some degree in other specs too.
> >
> > My suggestion for how to move toward coherence would be:
> >
> > 1. Confine the generic term "XSL" to situations which refer to
XSLFO _and_
> > XSLT collectively.
> > 2. When referring to XSL Formatting Objects the abbreviation to
be used
> > should be either "XSL-FO" or "XSLFO".
> > 3. When referring to XSL Transformations the abbreviation used
should be
> > "XSL-T" or "XSLT".
> > 4. It should be recognised that there are two "XSL Namespaces".
The XSLT
> > Namespace has a namespace URI of
http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform. The
> > XSL-FO Namespace has a namespace URI of
http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Format.
> > 5. The confusing "indicative prefix" (my term) for those two
namespaces
> > should be corrected/made consistent. I would suggest that the XSLT
> namespace
> > use the "indicative prefix" of "xslt" rather than "xsl" i.e. as an
> example,
> > the present
> > <xsl:stylesheet> element would become <xslt:stylesheet>.
Similarly the
> "fo"
> > indicative prefix would become "xslfo" i.e. <fo:root> would become
> > <xslfo:root>.
> >
> > I would propose that the W3C Core XML Group (do I have the
terminology
> > correct?) review the current inconsistency in terminology across
W3C specs
> > currently in draft or under revision and give clear, unambiguous
guidance
> on
> > which meaning "XSL" has in W3C documents.
> >
> > <side_issue>
> > [ With regard to the more specific problem relating to the naming
of the
> > current XSL-FO CR could that not be called the "Extensible
Stylesheet
> > Language Formatting Objects, XSL-FO" Recommendation in due time?
And could
> > another very short "XSL" REC indicate that XSL version 1.0
subsumes the
> XSLT
> > REC of November 1999 and the XSL-FO REC, currently at CR stage?
Then when
> > XSLT 1.1 is finalised "XSL 1.1" could be defined as "XSL-FO 1.0"
plus
> "XSLT
> > 1.1"? Just a thought. :) ]
> > </side_issue>
> >
> > Consistent usage of the term "XSL" is desirable. With the current
fluidity
> of
> > a XSL-FO CR and an XSLT 1.1 WD there is an early opportunity for
W3C to
> > introduce consistency where hitherto inconsistent and confusing
usage of
> the
> > term "XSL" has been rather too visible.
> >
> > *** Re-edited quote ends ***
> >
> > Returning to Robert's question about the "fo" namespace and the
confusion
> > that that term caused him - If my suggestions were adopted we
would refer
> to
> > that as the XSL-FO namespace with, in my view, much less
ambiguity than a
> > supposed but essentially spurious "XSL namespace".
> >
> > Sorry, to those for which this is pretty hard going. You need to
be fairly
> > familiar with how the specs use the terms to see that there is a
problem.
> And
> > perhaps more familiar to diagnose it and suggest a (hopefully
coherent)
> > remedy.
> >
> > I hope that the XSL-editors wil prove responsive to these
suggestions. It
> > would make teaching some parts of XSL/XSL-FO/XSLT to relative
beginners
> just
> > a little bit easier if the "standard" terms were used
consistently in the
> > definitive documents.
> >
> > Andrew Watt
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >
> >
IMHO, as an interested implementation party, dealing with the DOM is by far
the most trivial aspect of implementing FO.
Cheers!
Chris Ryland * Em Software, Inc. * www.emsoftware.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken MacLeod" <ken@...>
To: <XSL-FO@egroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 11:53 AM
Subject: Re: [XSL-FO] interest in FO "DOM lite"?
> [...]
>
> At this level, Orchard makes direct access to the nodes and their
> properties much simpler. The goal is that this makes developing
> software on top of the nodes (formatting, display, interaction) easier
> as well.
"Chris Ryland" <cpr@...> writes:
> IMHO, as an interested implementation party, dealing with the DOM is
> by far the most trivial aspect of implementing FO.
Is there a good summary of those aspect somewhere?
- formatting/rendering
- interactive update
- ???
-- Ken
XSLT-UK. The first XSL conference.
-----------------------------------
The first XSLT-UK conference will take place in the UK, Sunday and
Monday, 8-9 April 2001 in Keble College, Oxford, England. We now have
our speakers lined up, the venue is booked, and it is looking good for
an interesting two days.
The announce is at http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsltuk/, and
registration is open, at http://users.ox.ac.uk/~rahtz/regform.html
The conference is priced reasonably, and if you are really new to XSLT,
then Ken Holman's two day course is set to run on Friday and Saturday,
6th and 7th April 2001. This provides an ideal introduction to XSLT.
SPEAKERS:
* Jeni Tennison (Jeni Tennison Consulting Ltd): XSLT Design Patterns
* Michael Kay (ICL): XSLT performance
* Jacek Ambroziak (CrossGain Corporation, formerly Sun Microsystems):
The XSLT Compiler for the JVM
* Norm Walsh (Sun): Building and maintaining the Docbook XSL family
* Steve Muench (Oracle Corporation): XSLT and Databases: A Compelling
Combination for Web Apps
* Tom Kaiser (Ginger Alliance, Prague, Czech Republic): Charlie - an
XML application framework
* Wolfgang Emmerich (Dept. of Computer Science, University College
London): Markup Meets Middleware
* Leigh Dodds (xmlhack.com, ingenta ltd): Schematron: validating XML
using XSLT
* Mario Jeckle (DaimlerChrysler Research and Technology): Using XSLT
to derive schemata from UML
* Ben Robb (cScape Strategic Internet Services Ltd): Creating a diary
application using XSLT
* Evan Lenz (XYZFind Corp.): XSLT as a Query Language
* Arved Sandstrom (e-plicity): Implementing XSL formatting objects
* G. Ken Holman (Crane Softwrights Ltd.): Experiments Using XSLT With
Topic Maps
In a message dated 17/01/01 00:35:13 GMT Standard Time, r_diblasi@...
writes:
> I have to say that you have hit the nail firmly on the head and
> Chris's observation is most likely the cause of the problem....
>
> I think you proposal is right on the mark ....but of course the real
> world maybe harsh on this suggestion ......it would break a lot of
> code ...better to break early than late......
Robert, I agree it would be better to break code early rather than late. But
the amount of code which would be broken would, I think, be much less than
you imagine.
I am not proposing that the "namespace" be changed.
When we humans see e.g. <xsl:template> that is what we think.
However when an XSLT processor see <xsl:template> it actually "thinks" ...
sorry for the anthropomorphism ... it actually thinks
<http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform:template>.
What I am suggesting would leave the XSLT processor (or XSL Formatter) seeing
exactly the same.
I am only proposing that we rationalise the namespace _prefix_ ... in the
above example "xsl" ... to "xslt".
The namespace URI is not changed, under my proposals.
The primary change would be for someone typing code. The namespace prefix
"xsl" or "fo" is simply a convenience to stop us having to type
<www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Format:root>. To type <fo:root> is much more convenient.
If my suggestions were implemented we would type <xslfo:root>.
If you are still uncertain about the difference between namespace prefix and
namespace URI take a browse through Namespace in XML REC at
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/
I hope that helps.
Andrew Watt
> suggestion.....
> maybe just correct the spec and live the namespace alone....I'm not a
> fan of this suggestion...but it would make it sooooo much easier to
> teach others......believe it or not some of use the spec to teach
> others.......watch out for the sentence in the "xsl-fo spec" :-) were
> it states that it is not tutorial in nature:
> "This document is intended for implementors of such XSL
> processors. Although it can be used as a reference manual for writers
> of XSL style sheets, it is not tutorial in nature" I think that your
> logic about the miss use of the term "XSL" would still
> stand.....Implementors need to understand to......
I would just like to welcome the one hundredth member to the XSL-FO group on
eGroups.com.
I have to say I didn't expect the group to grow as fast as it has. From zero
to 100 members in only 12 days (founded on 5th January) has really surprised
me.
I thought it might take 3 months (maybe more) to get to that size. There must
be significantly more interest in XSL-FO than I had appreciated.
Unfortunately, "Member No.100" eGroups doesn't allow me to know who you are.
I only know you are one of 33 people who have joined the list today. Welcome
nonetheless. :)
Of course, members #2 to #99 are no less welcome.
It is great to see the group functioning so well at such an early stage.
Just a general reminder that all members are welcome to post links on new
tools, tutorial sites etc. At this stage I would suggest that any significant
new (pre-release or final version) XSL-FO tool might usefully be announced on
list as well as added to the Links page.
Andrew Watt
Thank you - by the way, I would like to hear (unbiassed as possible)
opinions on relative merits of RenderX as opposed to Apache FOP. If this is
too controversial, please ignore.
I have been using FOP myself and am pleased, and just for personal reasons
would like to support more open-source software.
-----Original Message-----
From: AndrewWatt2001@... [mailto:AndrewWatt2001@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 7:57 AM
To: XSL-FO@egroups.com
Subject: [XSL-FO] Welcome to member No.100 on XSL-FO group
I would just like to welcome the one hundredth member to the XSL-FO group on
eGroups.com.
I have to say I didn't expect the group to grow as fast as it has. From zero
to 100 members in only 12 days (founded on 5th January) has really surprised
me.
I thought it might take 3 months (maybe more) to get to that size. There
must
be significantly more interest in XSL-FO than I had appreciated.
Unfortunately, "Member No.100" eGroups doesn't allow me to know who you are.
I only know you are one of 33 people who have joined the list today. Welcome
nonetheless. :)
Of course, members #2 to #99 are no less welcome.
It is great to see the group functioning so well at such an early stage.
Just a general reminder that all members are welcome to post links on new
tools, tutorial sites etc. At this stage I would suggest that any
significant
new (pre-release or final version) XSL-FO tool might usefully be announced
on
list as well as added to the Links page.
Andrew Watt
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
I think we should debate the emerging tools, as long as we are not unfair,
I'm sure we will be corrected if that happens.
On a similar note, I'd like people's opinion on a number of statements in
the RenderX's documentation to the effect that they found XSL-FO candidate
recommendation to be lacking and/or nonsensical when it came to
implementation. I'm always wary of implementers claiming the spec isn't good
enough, but am open minded enough to understand that this a 1.0 spec and
will not be perfect.
I've searched for a good comprehensive tutorial (with examples) on XSL-FO,
but have not found what I need, so any suggestions would be appreciated.
Lee
-----Original Message-----
From: LEvensen@... [mailto:LEvensen@...]
Thank you - by the way, I would like to hear (unbiassed as possible)
opinions on relative merits of RenderX as opposed to Apache
FOP. If this is
too controversial, please ignore.
I have been using FOP myself and am pleased, and just for
personal reasons
would like to support more open-source software.
I think these tutorials are great:
http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/books/bible/updates/15.htmlhttp://www.zvon.org/xxl/xslfoReference/Output/index.htmlhttp://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl/sect3.html
Max
================================
Max Dunn
maxdunn@...
http://www.siliconpublishing.orghttp://www.siliconpublishing.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Pollington, Lee (ELSLON) [mailto:lee.pollington@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 8:42 AM
To: 'XSL-FO@egroups.com'
Subject: RE: [XSL-FO] Welcome to member No.100 on XSL-FO group
I think we should debate the emerging tools, as long as we are not unfair,
I'm sure we will be corrected if that happens.
On a similar note, I'd like people's opinion on a number of statements in
the RenderX's documentation to the effect that they found XSL-FO candidate
recommendation to be lacking and/or nonsensical when it came to
implementation. I'm always wary of implementers claiming the spec isn't good
enough, but am open minded enough to understand that this a 1.0 spec and
will not be perfect.
I've searched for a good comprehensive tutorial (with examples) on XSL-FO,
but have not found what I need, so any suggestions would be appreciated.
Lee
-----Original Message-----
From: LEvensen@... [mailto:LEvensen@...]
Thank you - by the way, I would like to hear (unbiassed as possible)
opinions on relative merits of RenderX as opposed to Apache
FOP. If this is
too controversial, please ignore.
I have been using FOP myself and am pleased, and just for
personal reasons
would like to support more open-source software.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Thanks Max for the links.
I looked through but couldn't find an example of what I need most of all and
that is multi-column spanning:
-----------------------
| |
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------
| | |
| | |
| | |
oops, keyboard shortcut sent that before I was finished
-----Original Message-----
From: Pollington, Lee (ELSLON)
Sent: 17 January 2001 17:30
To: 'XSL-FO@egroups.com'
Subject: multi-column spanning
Thanks Max for the links.
I looked through but couldn't find an example of what I need
most of all and that is multi-column spanning:
-----------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------
| | |
| | |
| | |
-----------------------
What mechanism does the above? I've seen the attribute span = " all | none |
inherit " on fo:block
and something about number of columns in region-body, but am still unsure
how you would accomplish this.
Lee
On multi-column spanning - not sure what in particular you need; speaking of
examples, FOP provides samples along with their download, not of everything.
I found that dealing with xsl for-each in particular ways was necessary to
get things into columns where I wanted them, that is, you need to do things
row-by-row as far as I can tell. I could suggest this group or the
moderator have a 'sample' page for examples people want to donate, and that
may be clearer than talking about particular problems.
-----Original Message-----
From: Pollington, Lee (ELSLON) [mailto:lee.pollington@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 8:42 AM
To: 'XSL-FO@egroups.com'
Subject: RE: [XSL-FO] Welcome to member No.100 on XSL-FO group
I think we should debate the emerging tools, as long as we are not unfair,
I'm sure we will be corrected if that happens.
On a similar note, I'd like people's opinion on a number of statements in
the RenderX's documentation to the effect that they found XSL-FO candidate
recommendation to be lacking and/or nonsensical when it came to
implementation. I'm always wary of implementers claiming the spec isn't good
enough, but am open minded enough to understand that this a 1.0 spec and
will not be perfect.
I've searched for a good comprehensive tutorial (with examples) on XSL-FO,
but have not found what I need, so any suggestions would be appreciated.
Lee
-----Original Message-----
From: LEvensen@... [mailto:LEvensen@...]
Thank you - by the way, I would like to hear (unbiassed as possible)
opinions on relative merits of RenderX as opposed to Apache
FOP. If this is
too controversial, please ignore.
I have been using FOP myself and am pleased, and just for
personal reasons
would like to support more open-source software.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Do you mean, what actually creates a grid like that between columns? If you
select border-style like this: <fo:table-cell border-style="solid"
border-width="1pt"> you will get that effect
-----Original Message-----
From: Pollington, Lee (ELSLON) [mailto:lee.pollington@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 9:34 AM
To: 'XSL-FO@egroups.com'
Subject: [XSL-FO] multi-column spanning (cont)
oops, keyboard shortcut sent that before I was finished
-----Original Message-----
From: Pollington, Lee (ELSLON)
Sent: 17 January 2001 17:30
To: 'XSL-FO@egroups.com'
Subject: multi-column spanning
Thanks Max for the links.
I looked through but couldn't find an example of what I need
most of all and that is multi-column spanning:
-----------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------
| | |
| | |
| | |
-----------------------
What mechanism does the above? I've seen the attribute span = " all | none |
inherit " on fo:block
and something about number of columns in region-body, but am still unsure
how you would accomplish this.
Lee
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> I could suggest this group or the
>moderator have a 'sample' page for examples people want to donate, and that
>may be clearer than talking about particular problems.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl/N272.html
If this group could organize a series of examples (dare I say tutorial in
nature?), we could then submit it to the XSL FAQ, and, for clarity, perhaps
Mr Pawson could be prevailed upon to subdivide the Examples link into XSLT
Examples and XSL-FO examples.
Just a thought (it won't happen again, I promise)
Edmund
See the example simplecol4.fo that comes with FOP. Set the span attribute
of fo:block to "all".
Max
-----Original Message-----
From: Pollington, Lee (ELSLON) [mailto:lee.pollington@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 9:30 AM
To: 'XSL-FO@egroups.com'
Subject: [XSL-FO] multi-column spanning
Thanks Max for the links.
I looked through but couldn't find an example of what I need most of all and
that is multi-column spanning:
-----------------------
| |
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------
| | |
| | |
| | |
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the XSL-FO
group:
Which tool are tou using to deal with
XSL-FO ?
o FOP from Apache
o RenderX
o I or my company use developed own tool
o other...
o none, I've not tried yet to use FO
To vote, please visit the following web page:
http://www.egroups.com/polls/XSL-FO
Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the eGroups
web site listed above.
Thanks!
I would be glad to submit examples, if someone/somewhere agreed to be the
collecting point..
-----Original Message-----
From: Edmund Mitchell [mailto:EMitchell@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 10:18 AM
To: 'XSL-FO@egroups.com'
Subject: RE: [XSL-FO] Welcome to member No.100 on XSL-FO group
> I could suggest this group or the
>moderator have a 'sample' page for examples people want to donate, and that
>may be clearer than talking about particular problems.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl/N272.html
If this group could organize a series of examples (dare I say tutorial in
nature?), we could then submit it to the XSL FAQ, and, for clarity, perhaps
Mr Pawson could be prevailed upon to subdivide the Examples link into XSLT
Examples and XSL-FO examples.
Just a thought (it won't happen again, I promise)
Edmund
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
You can upload files to e-groups: http://www.egroups.com/files/XSL-FO/
-----Original Message-----
From: LEvensen@... [mailto:LEvensen@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 10:37 AM
To: XSL-FO@egroups.com
Subject: RE: [XSL-FO] Welcome to member No.100 on XSL-FO group
I would be glad to submit examples, if someone/somewhere agreed to be the
collecting point..
-----Original Message-----
From: Edmund Mitchell [mailto:EMitchell@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 10:18 AM
To: 'XSL-FO@egroups.com'
Subject: RE: [XSL-FO] Welcome to member No.100 on XSL-FO group
> I could suggest this group or the
>moderator have a 'sample' page for examples people want to donate, and that
>may be clearer than talking about particular problems.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl/N272.html
If this group could organize a series of examples (dare I say tutorial in
nature?), we could then submit it to the XSL FAQ, and, for clarity, perhaps
Mr Pawson could be prevailed upon to subdivide the Examples link into XSLT
Examples and XSL-FO examples.
Just a thought (it won't happen again, I promise)
Edmund
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Hello Edmund,
I think that would be a great idea :-) I really like the idea
of dividing the examples into two group xslt and xsl-fo
I am working on a visual of how XSL (that is both xslt / xsl-fo)
I believe passionately that:
if you can draw out a process from start to finish than
you can say you understand something......(all thats left is the
level of abstraction you wish to view the problem)
I wish to understand the problem completely...there for I would like
to make the diagram (pictorial) explain in full detail.....
I will provide an example I am working on....... maybe in SVG :-)
Robert A. DiBlasi
y
--- In XSL-FO@egroups.com, Edmund Mitchell <EMitchell@f...> wrote:
>
>
> > I could suggest this group or the
> >moderator have a 'sample' page for examples people want to donate,
and that
> >may be clearer than talking about particular problems.
>
> http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl/N272.html
>
> If this group could organize a series of examples (dare I say
tutorial in
> nature?), we could then submit it to the XSL FAQ, and, for clarity,
perhaps
> Mr Pawson could be prevailed upon to subdivide the Examples link
into XSLT
> Examples and XSL-FO examples.
>
> Just a thought (it won't happen again, I promise)
>
> Edmund
--- In XSL-FO@egroups.com, Edmund Mitchell <EMitchell@f...> wrote:
>
>
> > I could suggest this group or the
> >moderator have a 'sample' page for examples people want to donate,
and that
> >may be clearer than talking about particular problems.
>
> http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl/N272.html
>
> If this group could organize a series of examples (dare I say
tutorial in
> nature?), we could then submit it to the XSL FAQ, and, for clarity,
perhaps
> Mr Pawson could be prevailed upon to subdivide the Examples link
into XSLT
> Examples and XSL-FO examples.
>
> Just a thought (it won't happen again, I promise)
>
> Edmund
XSL-FO@egroups.com writes:
> Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the XSL-FO group:
>
> Which tool are tou using to deal with
> XSL-FO ?
>
> o FOP from Apache
> o RenderX
> o I or my company use developed own tool
> o other...
> o none, I've not tried yet to use FO
Should add PassiveTeX to that poll
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~rahtz/passivetex/
--
Michael Smith mailto:smith@...
XML-Doc http://www.xml-doc.org/
Hey all
I've got a few spare gigabytes on my machine we can use while we're
searching for a permanent home for the examples.
If you'd rather wait for a better solution, my offer will remain open just
in case.
Edmund
-----Original Message-----
From: LEvensen@... [mailto:LEvensen@...]
I would be glad to submit examples, if someone/somewhere agreed to be the
collecting point..
-----Original Message-----
From: Edmund Mitchell [mailto:EMitchell@...]
> I could suggest this group or the
>moderator have a 'sample' page for examples people want to donate, and that
>may be clearer than talking about particular problems.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl/N272.html
If this group could organize a series of examples
Hello to All,
I am trying to figure out have to uses the terms:
"result tree" and "element and attribute tree"
here is what the specification says.....
"Tree transformation constructs the result tree. In XSL, this tree
is called the element and attribute tree, with objects primarily
in the "formatting object" namespace."
am I to take that to mean:
1) when the xsl-fo elements are added to the tree....
that is a tree that is composed of xsl-fo elements and other
namespaces possibly.....
this tree should be called the "element and attribute tree"
2) when looking a the tree that is created by tranformation from
the context of XSL-FO it should be refered to as element and
attribute tree" instead of "result tree"
any suggestion would help....
thanks..
Robert A. DiBlasi
Michael Smith <smith@...> wrote:
>XSL-FO@egroups.com writes:
>
>> Enter your vote today! Check out the new poll for the XSL-FO group:
>>
>> Which tool are tou using to deal with
>> XSL-FO ?
>>
>> o FOP from Apache
>> o RenderX
>> o I or my company use developed own tool
>> o other...
>> o none, I've not tried yet to use FO
>
>Should add PassiveTeX to that poll
>
> http://users.ox.ac.uk/~rahtz/passivetex/
and,
Unicorn Formatting Objects (UFO)
http://www.unicorn-enterprises.com/#products_ufo
Antenna House XSL Formatter
http://www.antennahouse.com/xslformatter.html
(i'm developing this :-))
MURAKAMI Shinyu
Max Dunn pointed out the 'files' folder
http://www.egroups.com/files/XSL-FO/...
But it would remain to someone to organize subfolders, if possible, so
everything's not in one lot
-----Original Message-----
From: Edmund Mitchell [mailto:EMitchell@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 11:09 AM
To: 'XSL-FO@egroups.com'
Subject: RE: [XSL-FO] Welcome to member No.100 on XSL-FO group
Hey all
I've got a few spare gigabytes on my machine we can use while we're
searching for a permanent home for the examples.
If you'd rather wait for a better solution, my offer will remain open just
in case.
Edmund
-----Original Message-----
From: LEvensen@... [mailto:LEvensen@...]
I would be glad to submit examples, if someone/somewhere agreed to be the
collecting point..
-----Original Message-----
From: Edmund Mitchell [mailto:EMitchell@...]
> I could suggest this group or the
>moderator have a 'sample' page for examples people want to donate, and that
>may be clearer than talking about particular problems.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl/N272.html
If this group could organize a series of examples
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
XSL-FO-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Send Email
