W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ppl@w3.org > March 2012

Re: Workflow - on the wiki

From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 16:37:15 +0000
Message-ID: <CAEncD4evn-kmLNndWU-Qb3LKh8iHt7S8ohy95rjL_g0YcMSheQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
Cc: public-ppl@w3.org
On 20 March 2012 15:16, David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> wrote:
> On 20/03/2012 07:19, Dave Pawson wrote:
>>
>> IMHO having a complete schema to validate (even within a syntax
>> directed editor) would make things much easier?
>
>
> Dave, I'm not sure what you are pushing for here. As Tony commented you
> could compare this to XSLT (not surprisingly given their shared
> background) In XSLT you could get rid of structured XPath attributes (as
> they can't be validated using pure xml schema languages) and end up with
> something like XQueryX instead where everything is exposed at the XML
> element level. But why?

I'm speaking of authoring at the xsl-fo level David? Not at the XSLT
with embedded xsl-fo ?  Is that what you meant?


>
> Making a future XSL-FO incompatible with CSS or with current XSL-FO
> would be a big step into the unknown, and it might be walking off a cliff.


Different view? The current xsl-fo is half way over the cliff (look at
W3C support?)
Make it work for users or forget it?

regards



-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
Docbook FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2012 16:37:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 20 March 2012 16:37:48 GMT