- From: <lee@sq.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Feb 97 21:40:51 EST
- To: www-style@w3.org
Bert Bos (I think) wrote: > [...] I doubt that the needs of commercial publishing are so > different from those of non-commercial institutions and of individuals. > The only difference is that the former may have the money to reach their > goals through a brute force approach. Jon Bosak wrote: > Let's just take one, simple, obvious, everyday example. [real example of auto-generating correctly numbered figures deleted by Liam] > This is a real commercial publishing problem that I have had to solve > on a number of occasions in real stylesheets for real publications. > [...] please don't claim that such problems do not exist or that they > don't need to be solved for commercial publishing. There is a perfectly consistent interpretation, I think: CSS fails both the commercial and the non-commercial institution in this regard, as in many other ways. We should thank CSS for making a great many people begin to understand why style sheets are needed. People who need to do more than trivial "publishing", and people who write markup/web-page-layout applications, will obviously use something more powerful when it becomes available. It's no surprise that there's a lot more talk about DSSSL now. Any particular feature you or I ask for could be probably added to CSS, given enough time. It will be interesting to see how Netscape's CSS extenstions are used, too, and how incompatible the style sheets will be. Why wait for standards on the Wild West Web? Because sometimes the rough-and-ready doesn't pan out. Oh dear, I'm sounding like Len, I'd better stop :-) I don't think there's any point expecting too much of CSS1. If you lower your expectations to "better than what we had before for many uses", I think it's OK. Maybe some good implementations of DSSSL with XML would encourage a migration :-) Lee
Received on Thursday, 6 February 1997 21:40:57 UTC