Re: Revise group description?

Jean, I tend to agree. The last time I saw an XSL-FO aficionado in Nova 
Scotia is when I had coffee with Tony this summer. I somehow suspect 
that there are hundreds of CSS experts in this province, on the other 
hand. And there are dozens of coders here who address their printing 
requirements with PDF libraries...directly driven from Java and such 
like rather than using declarative mechanisms like XSLT and XSL-FO. 
There are in fact very few programmers in my region who extensively use 
XSLT even...the people who do mostly use it in B2B and SOA. Little XSLT 
uptake, little XSL-FO uptake.

For what it's worth, I'm not convinced that either CSS or XSL-FO, both 
declarative mechanisms, are what most folks are comfortable with.

Arved

On 12/17/2013 02:19 PM, Jean Kaplansky wrote:
> I know that most of the activity in this group has been around XSL-FO, 
> but I think we might get more interest if we just say:
>
> “For people interested in page layout technologies…” rather than 
> explicitly saying XSL-FO.
>
> I have a hunch that this may be chasing any but the most hardcore 
> XSL-FO enthusiasts away. We already know that there are a lot of 
> people experimenting with CSS for print, for example. Also while most 
> people think of eBooks as being reflowable, there’s a huge demand for 
> fixed layout pages in eBooks in trade and educational titles. We 
> should try to get some of these people interested in the group.
>
> Just my $.02.
>
> -Jean K.
>
> From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com <mailto:dave.pawson@gmail.com>>
> Date: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 at 1:14 PM
> To: Tony Graham <tgraham@mentea.net <mailto:tgraham@mentea.net>>
> Cc: xsl-fo Community Group <public-ppl@w3.org <mailto:public-ppl@w3.org>>
> Subject: Re: Revise group description?
> Resent-From: <public-ppl@w3.org <mailto:public-ppl@w3.org>>
> Resent-Date: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 at 1:14 PM
>
> "For people interested in XSL-FO and related page layout technologies, the
> Print & Page Layout Community Group is the "virtual water cooler" where
> they can hang out and discuss aspects of the current draft, of test cases,
> of implementations, or of requirements in advance of their solution in any
> draft. The success of the XSL-FO meetup at XML Prague 2012 shows there's a
> strong undercurrent of interest in XSL-FO and its implementation, and the
> Print and Page Layout Community Group is intended as a place where we can
> start to build a larger community of XSL-FO users and help to raise the
> visibility of this important technology."
>
> An alternative:
> the Print & Page Layout Community Group is  here to discuss XSL-FO,
> requirements or other aspects of XML in print.
>
> The success of the XSL-FO as a technology shows there's a
> strong interest in development and  implementation. The
> Print and Page Layout Community Group is intended as a place to
> build a  community of XSL-FO users and  raise the
> visibility of this  technology
>
>
> HTH
>
> On 17 December 2013 12:39, Tony Graham <tgraham@mentea.net 
> <mailto:tgraham@mentea.net>> wrote:
>
>     The description at the top of http://www.w3.org/community/ppl/ is
>     looking
>     a bit dated:
>
>     ----
>     For people interested in XSL-FO and related page layout
>     technologies, the
>     Print & Page Layout Community Group is the "virtual water cooler"
>     where
>     they can hang out and discuss aspects of the current draft, of
>     test cases,
>     of implementations, or of requirements in advance of their
>     solution in any
>     draft. The success of the XSL-FO meetup at XML Prague 2012 shows
>     there's a
>     strong undercurrent of interest in XSL-FO and its implementation,
>     and the
>     Print and Page Layout Community Group is intended as a place where
>     we can
>     start to build a larger community of XSL-FO users and help to
>     raise the
>     visibility of this important technology.
>     ----
>
>     Whether or not you think XSL-FO is looking a bit dated, the
>     references to
>     'current draft' and 'XML Prague 2012' definitely are.
>
>     What should go in a revised description?
>
>     Regards,
>
>
>     Tony.
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Dave Pawson
> XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
> Docbook FAQ.
> http://www.dpawson.co.uk
>
>