The people at InDelv had implemented FO's for their product. However, the 
conformance was an earlier draft. Unfortunately, their betas have disappeared 
from their site and been replaced by a Java DOM library. I'm note sure what has 
happened to the other work. Maybe they got 'lucky' and found some real money.

The site is at:	http://www.InDelv.com/

Regards.							...edN

-----Original Message-----
From:	David LeBlanc [SMTP:whisper@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent:	Wednesday, January 27, 1999 9:25 AM
To:	xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject:	RE: Observation

Actually, at this stage of development of the spec, I'd say that the
Template portion of the XSL spec is further developed and better understood
then the Flow Objects portion. Currently there is only one  XSL
implementation that I know of that implements Flow Objects called FOP.

Dave LeBlanc

At 09:21 PM 1/26/99 -0500, Didier PH Martin wrote:
>HI Paul,
>
>So you mean that actual XSL implementation do not inlude formating objects
>and this is why I don't see a lot of scripts with that. Do I reflect well
>what you mean?
>
>If that is the case, XSL seems popular for its template more than for the
>formatting objects. If that is the case, always, DSSSL was not so popular
>not necessarily because of parenthesis but because people seems to prefer
>template based stuff.
>
>Regards
>Didier PH Martin
>mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>http://www.netfolder.com


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list