At 7:19 PM +0200 7/31/01, Petr Andrs wrote:


>I think there is other reason for formatters beeing not production redy 
>as well. This reason is that XSL FO is only in CR state of its first 
>version. I think 1.1 or 2.0 XSL FO Recomendation will be far better.
>

I don't think that's it. I haven't found any cases where XSL FO was insufficiently 
expressive for my needs (essentially laying out a computer book). There've been a 
couple of cases where Docbook was insufficiently expressive, but there are workarounds 
for that. The problems I encountered were all in implementation, not in the language. 
A new version of XSLFO wouldn't really help me any. 
-- 

+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ 
|          The XML Bible, 2nd Edition (Hungry Minds, 2001)           |
|              http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/books/bible2/              |
|   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764547607/cafeaulaitA/   |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
|  Read Cafe au Lait for Java News:  http://www.cafeaulait.org/      | 
|  Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/     |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to