That is what I was looking for...a simple, boiled down, no
nonsence, explanation......I hope thats what we are are looking for!!
nice touch....adding the SVG namespace :-)
thanks for your comment
Robert A. DiBlasi
--- In XSL-FO@egroups.com, "Chris Ryland" <cpr@e...> wrote:
I think all it's trying to say is that, after tree transformation by
XLST, the resulting tree is mostly FO objects (with the possibility
of other namespace objects, such as SVG).
Chris Ryland * Em Software, Inc. * www.emsoftware.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: r_diblasi@h...
> To: XSL-FO@egroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2001 10:27 AM
> Subject: [XSL-FO] Re: 1.1.2 Formatting ...please help
> Hello Andrew,
> I believe your "crack" at the concept that was trying to
> explained in the XSL spec is much clearer.
> I still think that the uses of "result tree" (XSLT term I
> believe) and "element and attribute tree" can cause trouble if
> I'm still having trouble with a phrase that is used:
> "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."
> "with objects primarily in the "formatting object" namespace."????
> What is the spec trying to say????