W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2000

Re: Default XSL stylesheet for XHTML documents

From: Ian Hickson <ianh@netscape.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 13:10:21 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.21.0010011302250.952-100000@HIXIE.netscape.com>
On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:

>>> Conversion to PDF for printing and document exchange when XHTML+CSS
>>> isn't appropriate.
>> XHTML+XSLT+XSL:FO can do no more than XHTML+XSLT+CSS.
> So development of XSL is waste of time?

XSL covers two completely different technologies, XSLT and XSL:FO. 

IMHO, the development of XSL:FO is a waste of time, yes.


> XML documents can be transformed to XHTML documents and styled with
> CSS equally so noone needs XSL[FO]? Why didn't anyone notice that and
> stopped XSL[FO] development?

That's what several people have been asking for a while now. I have seen
no answer.

 
>> What's more, XSL has not even reached version 1.0 yet. CSS is currently
>> in the development of it's third revision.
> 
> You do not want to tell me, the higher the version number is, the
> better the technologie.

Not as a general rule, no. The point I was trying to make is that CSS is
already much more mature. Consider how long it has taken for CSS to be
fully implemented in browsers -- more than 4 years (we are not there yet).
XSL:FO is *as complicated* as CSS (since it uses similar basic
principles). Thus it will probably take as long to reach maturity.

The argument about CSS being a better technology is very well covered by
Haakon's article, which you mentioned previously.

-- 
Ian Hickson                                     )\     _. - ._.)       fL
Netscape, Standards Compliance QA              /. `- '  (  `--'
+1 650 937 6593                                `- , ) -  > ) \
irc.mozilla.org:Hixie _________________________  (.' \) (.' -' __________
Received on Sunday, 1 October 2000 16:07:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:06 GMT