W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xsl-fo@w3.org > December 2010

Re: 6.2 in xsl-fo 1.1

From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 22:04:35 -0500
To: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
Cc: www-xsl-fo@w3.org
Message-ID: <1292468675.2477.297.camel@desktop.barefootcomputing.com>
On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 07:49 +0000, Dave Pawson wrote:
> On 8 December 2010 21:07, Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org> wrote:
> > The notation used is described in 6.2, "Formatting Object Content",
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xsl11-20061205/#d0e6532
> there is no explanation of PCDATA in 6.2 Liam? Only what substitutions
> may be made.
> >
> > Although DTDs are less commonly used these days, they're still very
> > much part of XML of course. Do you think that it'd be clearer if we
> > used some other notation for 2.0?
> I'm wondering if that is clear, or makes an assumption about
> DTD understanding?
> The content models used do stand for use in relax NG,
> just that they aren't complete? See my bugzilla entreis.

XSL-FO 1.0 predates relax, and pretty much predates W3C XML Schema,
the schema definition language of choice at W3C :-)

#PCDATA is a basic part of XML syntax, and the idea that you
would use XML without a DTD was still fairly new at the time --
I think it was probably expected that most readers would be
familiar with DTD syntax.

I'm not sure I want to see XSD syntax being used in the
XSL-FO 2.0 document, as it takes up quite a lot of room,
but it's for sure useful to have a formal notation.

So, it's a subject for discussion within the working Group,
as well as a place where public feedback
would be welcome.


Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org www.advogato.org
Received on Thursday, 16 December 2010 03:04:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:10:13 UTC