docbook-apps

"Jan Tosovsky" <j.tosovsky@email.cz> writes:
> While I don't plan to upgrade my generating workflow to XSL 2.0 stylesheets
> in the near future, I am quite curious whether the proposed HTML+CSS
> approach can really cover all common needs:
>
> 1. ToC and Index with page numbers
> 2. Bookmarks
> 3. Double-sided version (different recto/verso margins, header/footer
> content)
> 4. Running header-footers (differences amongst title, blank or recto/verso
> pages)
> 5. Absolute positioning of title page graphics or other page elements
> 6. Using PDF format for images
> 7. Change bars

Some of those things are easy, some not so easy. But I expect they can
all be done. Not from the stock HTML stylesheets that you'd use on the
web, but from a HTML-for-print stylesheet. I hear that O'Reilly now
uses HTML+CSS for their print books.

The reality is that free XSL FO tools never really matured. The
commercial ones all work, but all have extensions to handle things
that weren't fully specified.

There's a large community focused on HTML+CSS+JS these days. It seems
more likely (to me) that free HTML+CSS print tools will come along
before greatly improved free XSL FO tools. Especially since future work
on XSL FO has largely been abandoned.

There are commercial HTML+CSS print formatters today that seem to be
comparable to the XSL FO ones. AntennaHouse supports both and
PrinceXML seems to do a competent job.

Be seeing you,
norm

--
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Everything that irritates us about
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | others can lead us to an
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | understanding of ourselves.--Carl
| Jung

On 2013-12-09 Norman Walsh wrote:
>
> ... future work on XSL FO has largely been abandoned.

Does it mean that XSL-FO 2.0/next is not planned any more? Is there any
citation for this?

Thanks, Jan

On Mon, December 9, 2013 10:04 pm, Jan Tosovsky wrote:
> On 2013-12-09 Norman Walsh wrote:
>>
>> ... future work on XSL FO has largely been abandoned.
>
> Does it mean that XSL-FO 2.0/next is not planned any more? Is there any
> citation for this?

http://www.w3.org/XML/XPPL/

There weren't enough dues-paying members involved for the W3C to continue
the work.

The next best place for anything to happen is the Print and Page Layout
Community Group [1]. We've been experimenting [2] (slowly) with feedback
and decision making in FO processing, but it really needs more people to
show an interest for it to progress.

Regards,


Tony Graham tgraham@mentea.net
Consultant http://www.mentea.net
Mentea 13 Kelly's Bay Beach, Skerries, Co. Dublin, Ireland
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
XML, XSL-FO and XSLT consulting, training and programming
Chair, Print and Page Layout Community Group @ W3C

[1] http://www.w3.org/community/ppl/
[2] http://www.w3.org/community/ppl/wiki/FOPRunXSLTExt