(unknown charset) Re: Default XSL stylesheet for XHTML documents

On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:

>>> So let me ask, has anyone converted
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/sample.html
>>> to a XSL Stylesheet that transforms XHTML documents into formatting
>>> objetcs (as work in progress, of cause, since XSL is still no recommendation)?
>>
>> [...] your question brings to mind a bigger question: Why Bother?
>
> Conversion to PDF for printing and document exchange when XHTML+CSS
> isn't appropriate.

XHTML+XSLT+XSL:FO can do no more than XHTML+XSLT+CSS.

Indeed, to quote from the document you mentioned:

: Q: But, in order to do high-quality printing we need
: transformations. CSS doesn't have transformations and is therefore
: unusable. Isn't that why XTL and XFO were developed?
:
: A: High-quality printing is very hard, and can't be done without looking
: at the shape of the glyphs. Neither XFO nor CSS takes this 
: approach. Instead, they both have the same property/value model and as
: long as the properties and values are the same, their potential for
: improving printing is the same. Transformations are, if not a
: prerequisite of printing, at least a helpful tool. The transformation
: step comes before the styling part, and XTL can equally well be used
: with CSS as it can with XFO.

What's more, XSL has not even reached version 1.0 yet. CSS is currently in
the development of it's third revision.


> This problem is discussed by Håkon Lie, see
> http://www.operasoft.com/people/howcome/1999/foch.html

This was published in 1999. I have still not seen a single satisfactory
answer to his comments.

This issue has also been brought up by David Baron (in a thread entitled
"The Supercharged FONT Tag" or some such) and was never answered either.

-- 
Ian Hickson                                     )\     _. - ._.)       fL
Netscape, Standards Compliance QA              /. `- '  (  `--'
+1 650 937 6593                                `- , ) -  > ) \
irc.mozilla.org:Hixie _________________________  (.' \) (.' -' __________

Received on Sunday, 1 October 2000 15:12:42 UTC