Johannes Schaefer wrote:
With what is proposed now would I have to define a lot of classes like class="color_ff00ff" and define these classes in the file-specific config?
Take a look at the OOo plugin. It does exactly this with a similar file format, although it places the style stiff in the xdoc so this is only a partial solution, but at least it uses classes. Perhaps you can try and replicate for the Excel sheet to see if it works. Here's a where to start looking:
In the root template we have
<header>
<title>
....
</title>
<xsl:call-template name="style"/>
</header>The style template looks like this:
<xsl:template name="style">
<style>
<xsl:apply-templates select="//office:styles/style:style"/>
<xsl:apply-templates select="//office:automatic-styles/style:style"/>
</style>
</xsl:template>The rest of the templates you can easily trace from here. We match all the style information that we want to allow through to the skinning stage, therefore it would be possible to configure which style information we allow and which we disallow on a per document basis.
With this RT this style information would be extracted with the request for the plugin config stuff rather than embedded in head.
Can this work for Excel sheets?
Or would I need to extend the DTD to validate this single file and provide an XSL fragment (like extra-XSL) to translate it?
No, we do not want style information in our intermediate format so no extending the DTD.
Just my part of RT ;-)
I'm glad you spoke up, it is your post that prompted me to write this RT it has been knocking around on my To Do list for some time. Now there are three of us with a strong use case (Thorsten is the third) it should be easier to discover a suitable solution.
Ross
