s/the publishing of XSL 1.0/the publishing of XSL-FO 1.0/ On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Glenn Adams <[email protected]> wrote:
> I completely agree with the last sentence in your email. When I talk about > "mis-spending" time, I am referring to discussions about the process of > creating a valid XSLFO file. However, that is just my opinion. Someone else > made the decision to include the XML via XSLT to XSLFO process in FOP, so we > have to live with that. But since that is just a convenience function in > FOP, and not an aspect of the core engine of FOP, I find discussions of the > XML via XSTL to XSLFO process to be a distraction from the core features of > FOP. If it had been my decision, I would not have included that convenience > function in FOP, but that's irrelevant at this point. > > G. > > P.S. Though I wasn't a member of the XSL WG, I was an active participant of > the XSL-FO subgroup from the time of its inauguration to the publishing of > XSL 1.0. Prior to that I was an active participant in ISO SC18/WG8 in > developing ISO/IEC 10179 Document Style Semantics and Specification Language > (DSSSL), which was the logical precursor to both XSLT and XSL-FO. Indeed, I > was an early proponent of separating the transformation and formatting > aspects of DSSSL that was eventually translated into separate XSLT and > XSL-FO specs. > > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:36 AM, Eric Douglas <[email protected]>wrote: > >> ** >> Once someone has valid XSLFO and they're not getting the expected output >> then it's an FOP question. >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* Glenn Adams [mailto:[email protected]] >> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 30, 2011 11:41 PM >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: XSL vs. FOP [was: Re: pagenumbering] >> >> Christopher, >> >> We may be applying different ontological models here. >> >> I label anything having to do with XSL-FO as FO related. >> >> I label anything having to do with XSLT as XSL related. >> >> For me, FO related != XSL related. >> >> In fact, there is no necessary logical connection between the two, except >> insofar as FO borrows/reuses certain constructs from XSL(T), the only one of >> which I know of is the number to string conversion properties, which, >> coincidentally, have to do with the current subject matter: page number >> generation. >> >> In any case, by model, page number properties are FO related, not XSL >> related. >> >> Because FOP supports both XSL(T) [indirectly} and FO, it certainly covers >> both areas, but as far as I'm concerned the XSL(T) portion of it is a >> convenience function, unrelated to its core functionality. >> >> Given the amount of traffic (mis)spent on issues related to the XSL(T) >> features of FOP, I often wish it did not support this convenience function. >> But that's neither here nor there. >> >> G. >> >> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Christopher R. Maden <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> On 08/30/2011 10:52 AM, Glenn Adams wrote: >>> > actually, this is an FO issue, not XSL, since it is FOP that >>> > generates page numbers via <fo:page-number> >>> >>> XSL encompasses both Formatting Objects (sometimes “XSL-FO”) and XSL >>> Tranformations (XSLT). An FO issue *is* an XSL issue. >>> >>> It is FOP that generates page numbers, but what Theresa needed was the >>> FO instruction, which is agnostic about the software that consumes it >>> (whether FOP, RenderX, Antenna House, or anything else). >>> >>> The XSL List (<URL: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list/ >) covers >>> all of XSL, including XSL-FO. >>> >>> We’ve previously had discussions on this list about allowing XML+XSLT as >>> input to FOP, and the potential user confusion that results as to what >>> FOP actually does. For similar reasons, when I reply to questions here, >>> I try to make it clear what parts are specific to FOP, and which >>> questions are about XML, XSLT, or FO, and orthogonal to FOP’s operation >>> specifically. >>> >>> > the correct answer is that you need to use the initial-page-number >>> > property on fo:page-sequence to specify a different starting number >>> > than is generated by "auto"; >>> > >>> > see http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xsl11-20061205/#initial-page-number >>> > and and >>> > http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xsl11-20061205/#fo_page-sequence for >>> > details; >>> >>> Yes, and I apologize for not taking the time to look up the references >>> that Theresa needs. >>> >>> ~Chris >>> >>> [Emotional content notice (since plain text is really bad at >>> communicating this): I want to be very clear that I am not attacking or >>> criticizing Glenn or Theresa. And certainly, I’ve known Glenn by his >>> work for far too long to accuse him of anything remotely resembling >>> ignorance. I have simply attempted to be somewhat detailed and pedantic >>> here for maximal clarity to everyone who might read this.] >>> -- >>> Chris Maden, text nerd <URL: http://crism.maden.org/ > >>> “The present tendency and drift towards the Police State gives all >>> free Americans pause.” — Alabama Supreme Court, 1955 >>> (Pike v. Southern Bell Tel. & Telegraph, 81 So.2d 254) >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >>> >> >
