- From: Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca>
- Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2013 08:32:13 -0400
- To: public-ppl@w3.org
My suggestion is, following on from my previous posts, let's take 2 or 3 formatting-feedback use cases, sufficiently different, and figure out what combination of new FO and/or programmatic hooks (API) would be reasonable to allow feedback and actions. By actions I mean alternative paths based on feedback, to keep it simple - it could of course get more complex. It seems to me that we're here to define common APIs and to advance XSL x.x (iow, not target a specific existing version, although 2.0 would be good). Arved On 02/10/2013 08:10 AM, Dave Pawson wrote: > On 10 February 2013 11:59, Tony Graham <tgraham@mentea.net> wrote: >> On Sun, February 10, 2013 11:26 am, Patrick Gundlach wrote: >>> I'll write something up and put it into the wiki. >>> >>> 1) What kind of problems do we deal in day to day work? >>> 2) My layout language "specification" >>> >>> So we can discuss it and compare it to the requirements of XSL-FO 2.0 >> and/or CSS 3 >> >> Thanks, that would be good food for thought. >> >>> Hope to be finished end of next week. >> But now that we're awake, we don't need to go back to sleep until Patrick >> has put something up. Are we here to shore-up XSL 1.1 (as seemed to me to >> be a concern when we started), to define common APIs, to advance XSL 2.0 >> in the absence of anywhere else doing it, to try to build bridges with CSS >> paged media work, or what? > A concern is that, since few/no W3C members are interested, what to do > with requirements/ideas for further developments? > > One option would be a post (long term?) from this group. > > What other options are there? > > regards > > > >
Received on Sunday, 10 February 2013 12:32:41 UTC