On 6.7.2012 18:43, Gabor Kovesdan wrote: > can also be embedded into the output HTML file. If not because of the > single file, why would anyone nowadays need an obsolete HTML file > polluted with lots of deprecated formatting elements?
Could you point us to deprecated formatting elements emitted by stylesheets? > I think it just > encourages people keep using bad practices, adds complexity to the > stylesheets and adds overhead for the stylesheet developers. All modern > browsers can now deal with HTML Strict + CSS. Browsers deal with HTML5 + CSS so there is no need to target legacy HTML Strict. > Thanks, I'll take a look at this. Actually, in this case I use the > stylesheets as a basis of DocBook Slides stylesheets that I'm working on > in Summer of Code. And there I wanted to give a default CSS formatting > for the tables. You can simply use selectors .informaltable table .table table to match only real DocBook tables not tables used for navigation and few other things. >> I'm surprised about the comment about class attributes. The stylesheets >> emit class values for pretty much every element. An informaltable is >> contained in a div element with class="informaltable". Was that not present >> in your output? > > No, definitely not. And I just call <xsl:apply-templates/> to generate the > content part of my foils so I haven't made any customizations on > informaltables. You are probably using HTML table model not CALS. It seems that for HTML table model enclosing <div> with proper class is not emitted, this is bug. Probably no one faced this before because legacy DocBook users as me are relying on CALS tables. > Apart from this particular issue, I'm a FreeBSD doc developer and I'm > working on migrating from DocBook 4.1 SGML and DSSSL to DocBook 4.2 and > XSLT. I talked to another FreeBSD developer about this migration and he > had the same complaint about the XSLT stylesheets. He said he couldn't > format his HTML output with CSS and he rewrote the stylesheets from > scratch for a smaller subset of elements he uses. So I'm not the only > one who had such problems. My experience is that the current output can be restyled in any way using CSS. > Accommodating many type of users - as you say > - is good and an important point but I think not supporting the commonly > accepted correct usage in favor of some legacy features is a wrong > decision. Maybe the development directions should be reconsidered. There are XSLT 2.0 based stylesheets that aim to output more clean and more HTML5ish code: https://github.com/docbook/xslt20-stylesheets Jirka -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Jirka Kosek e-mail: [email protected] http://xmlguru.cz ------------------------------------------------------------------ Professional XML consulting and training services DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing ------------------------------------------------------------------ OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 member ------------------------------------------------------------------
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
