- From: Tony Graham <tgraham@mentea.net>
- Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 17:43:45 -0000 (GMT)
- To: "xsl-fo Community Group" <public-ppl@w3.org>
On Thu, December 19, 2013 6:25 am, Dave Pawson wrote: ... > Should this group scope its work to include / exclude transformations? > DSSSL had transform/layout, as did XSL (initially). Do you mean 'transform' as in the transformation part of the DSSSL standard, as in the SGML backend that James Clark implemented in Jade, or as in the flow objects didn't have to be 1:1 with the original elements? XSL 1.1 does have transformation, it just happens to be in a different document: The provisions in "XSL Transformations" form an integral part of this Recommendation and are considered normative. [1] > My view, XSLT does a good job. Keep it out of scope. I don't think anyone would believe it if we said this CG was going to rewrite XSLT, and if it was even possible, it would have to be a radical, orders-of-magnitude improvement for it to be implemented and adopted. I doubt we have the resources to rewrite XSL-FO and get it implemented and adopted, so XSLT is safely out of scope IMO. Regards, Tony. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xsl11/#d0e389
Received on Thursday, 19 December 2013 17:44:38 UTC