Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Paul Prescod wrote: > Well, we could require the output to be PDF or PostScript or something, > but XML seems the most logical choice. The important thing is to recognize > that we do have to choose *something*. Granted. But is it so much to ask, to be able to produce well-formed HTML as well? After all, the XSL draft is speckled with references to doing so, but well-formed and valid HTML just isn't XML -- even though with one little allowance, it can become so. Given the continuing importance of HTML or HTML+CSS as an output format, this doesn't seem like such a large change. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@c... You tollerday donsk? N. You tolkatiff scowegian? Nn. You spigotty anglease? Nnn. You phonio saxo? Nnnn. Clear all so! 'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5) xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
