[EMAIL PROTECTED] (W. Borgert) writes: > Is DSSSL outdated and I should use XSL?
DSSSL is not "outdated", but I find that these days using XSL seems to require less intimate knowledge of the tools, making it the path of least resistance. I don't think the printed materials look as nice yet---I'm thinking of the PDFs you get running stuff through Fop---but if PassiveTeX ever gets packaged, it will probably get even harder to justify using anything else, as I've heard its output rivals anything JadeTeX was able to do. > The stylesheets seem to produce always one large HTML file from a > book or article, while I would prefer the way db2html handles it. > Is there a trick, how to do this? If you read through the documentation closely---I think I found it on nwalsh.com, but I'm not sure, maybe it was in /usr/share/doc---you'll find references to xtchunk.xsl, which will do what you want---and despite the fact that the docs make it sound like it's XT specific, xsltproc seems to chew on it just fine. For my documents, I use a customization template like the following: <?xml version='1.0'?> <xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"; version='1.0' xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/transitional"; exclude-result-prefixes="#default"> <xsl:import href="/usr/share/sgml/docbook/stylesheet/xsl/nwalsh/html/xtchunk.xsl"/> <xsl:variable name="html.stylesheet">guide.css</xsl:variable> <xsl:variable name="toc.section.depth">2</xsl:variable> <xsl:variable name="section.autolabel">1</xsl:variable> <xsl:variable name="generate.division.toc">0</xsl:variable> <xsl:variable name="toc.list.type">ul</xsl:variable> <xsl:variable name="use.extensions">1</xsl:variable> <xsl:variable name="use.id.as.filename">ul</xsl:variable> </xsl:stylesheet> I put this in a file named guide.xsl, and I invoke xsltproc as: xsltproc guide.xml guide.xsl And it produces multiple files. When I go through and finish IDing all my articles/sections, it'll even name them they way I want. :-) > If I have to use XSL, which XSLT processor in Debian is suitable for > the docbook-xsl-stylesheets? I tried xsltproc, which worked fine, > but maybe another is better/faster/ whatever? I like xsltproc---it's seems fast, at least since 0.13 or so it seems pretty darn complete, etc. I have considered playing with saxon because it has the ability to do includes in a way that I gather doesn't require pre-processing them to escape entities, and since some of my documentation could benefit from that, it's tempting. But it's *almost* as easy to have make just preprocess them---I use the following make rule and snippet of perl to encode them: %.xml : %; perl -MHTML::Entities -pe 'encode_entities ($$_)' $< > $@ Mike. -- "One does not write satire anymore; one merely tries to stay half a step ahead of reality." -- Jon Carroll
