[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
At 09:30 2-08-2000 +1200, Matthew Bentley wrote:
? The difference is exactly what the first poster was talking about. XSLT 1.0 is a W3C Recommendation. XSLT 1.0 is not going to change (modulo errata). XSLT 1.1 or XSLT 2.0 may be added, but XSLT 1.0 is not going to change. Its status section says, "It is a stable document and may be used as reference material or cited as a normative reference from other documents."
XSL proper is a Working Draft, which means that it is explicitly subject to change. Its status section says, "It is a draft document and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time."
That's true. The instability of XSL is the problem here; FOP implementation began, and then XSL changed (or rather, continued to change). FOP is trying to keep up, but XSL will almost certainly change again before it reaches stable Recommendation status. Implementation in XSLT can be done in a production environment. XSL implementation should not be considered anything other than experimental until at least Candidate Recommendation status.
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
RE: FO
|
Subject: RE: FO From: "Christopher R. Maden" <crism@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 15:56:49 -0700 |
At 09:30 2-08-2000 +1200, Matthew Bentley wrote:
>1. XSL-FO is still a working draft. They specifically tell you that they >will not be constrained by implementations when making changes. It is >also this changing specification that drives the development of FOP so, >as soon as it's possible after a new draft is out, they update FOP to >comply with the new draft... and that will not change until XSL-FO >becomes a standard.
And...? XSLT is also still a working draft (Or a recommendation - I forget the difference).
? The difference is exactly what the first poster was talking about. XSLT 1.0 is a W3C Recommendation. XSLT 1.0 is not going to change (modulo errata). XSLT 1.1 or XSLT 2.0 may be added, but XSLT 1.0 is not going to change. Its status section says, "It is a stable document and may be used as reference material or cited as a normative reference from other documents."
XSL proper is a Working Draft, which means that it is explicitly subject to change. Its status section says, "It is a draft document and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time."
Yet I would consider XSLT to have an amount of stability (Within reason). This doesn't answer my question. Secondly, FOP is only compatible with the old working draft, far as I know.
That's true. The instability of XSL is the problem here; FOP implementation began, and then XSL changed (or rather, continued to change). FOP is trying to keep up, but XSL will almost certainly change again before it reaches stable Recommendation status. Implementation in XSLT can be done in a production environment. XSL implementation should not be considered anything other than experimental until at least Candidate Recommendation status.
-Chris -- Christopher R. Maden, Senior XML Analyst, Lexica LLC 222 Kearny St., Ste. 202, San Francisco, CA 94108-4510 +1.415.901.3631 tel./+1.415.477.3619 fax <URL:http://www.lexica.net/> <URL:http://www.oreilly.com/%7Ecrism/>
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
| Current Thread |
|---|
|
| <- Previous | Index | Next -> |
|---|---|---|
| RE: FO, Sebastian Rahtz | Thread | RE: FO, Matthew Bentley |
| RE: more on XSLT processor performa, Sebastian Rahtz | Date | RE: retrieving a piece of data from, Jeni Tennison |
| Month |