W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xsl-fo@w3.org > June 2002

Re: [www-xsl-fo] <none>

From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 15:02:20 +0100
Message-Id: <200206101402.PAA14155@penguin.nag.co.uk>
To: gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
CC: www-xsl-fo@w3.org

  It is in section 6.4 of the December 1996 CSS 1 specification:


Yes but why on earth is the syntax of CSS carried over as well as the
value (ie the URI ref itself).  everywhere else a CSS construct is 
copied into XSL, XML syntax is used, and here an XML attribute would be
the natural syntax not some pseudo function syntax. If I recall
correctly, last time there was a thread on this (before REC) the answer
was related to using URI references in shorthand attributes where they
haven't got a whole attribute to themselves. But since I think shorthands
are one of the less desirable aspects of XSL, I don't really think they
can be used as a justification of anything, and certainly not of


This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.
Received on Monday, 10 June 2002 10:02:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:58:26 UTC