Re: Prerequisites for modifying XSL 2.0 spec or producing API

On Tue, February 12, 2013 2:46 pm, Liam R E Quin wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-02-12 at 14:21 +0000, Tony Graham wrote:
>>    Since the XPPL WG is/was a closed group, we would strictly
>>    speaking need Liam or someone within the W3C to make the last
>>    draft public and/or bless our use of it
> Go ahead, but you and Dave need to check in any changes to CVS that you
> might have made since the last public draft.

Thanks.  That counts as sufficient go-ahead to me.

>> and we'd need the
>>    infrastructure maintainers to make a Mercurial repository for
>>    us.
> I'm not sure about this one; I'll try and find out today; I'm in a
> Workshop so might take a couple of days.

It's offered at

> It would also be a good idea to see if developers from Antenna House,
> RenderX, FOP, are watching (I know that Inventive Designers and xmlroff
> are here!). In other words, who is likely to implement anything that is

Also FOP.

> done here?

That is the crux of the problem.

I guess another prerequisite is user expectation that XSL-FO can do
whatever we spec, so that users can pressure vendors to implement it.  In
a recent conversation with a vendor, I was told that their users had never
asked for or about upcoming features from the WD.



Received on Tuesday, 12 February 2013 15:00:45 UTC