On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 00:43 +0100, Peter Ring wrote:
> Earlier this year, it was suggested on the docbook-apps list
>that lean clean XHTML output might be desirable for some purposes [2].
>As Bob Stayton says [3]:
>
> "Since this XHTML would be dependent on CSS for styling, I think the spec would have to include a template for the CSS."
If I ever get round to it, I'd like to try Norm's rev 5 approach to
customisation
for this. I still think it's a worker, and a common format could
possibly meet the 80%.
http://norman.walsh.name/2005/11/05/dbtiny
>
> This "template for the CSS" would amount to a declarative spec for rendering expectations of (a significant part of) DocBook elements.
> The CSS should be modular to better refelect the various genii and
species of DocBook >elements. A modular template might rely on
extensions similar to XXE's [4], or a trivial
> representation of the CSS syntax in XML.
I guess this is where we differ in our opinions. (Or I misuderstand the
intent).
I (say) want rough and ready output for a website.
Peter wants very slick presentations for his legal customers.
I can't see a common CSS model there, can you?
I like the way I can ask the stylesheets to hang class attributes for me
to use with CSS,
but I'll use purple background where Peter will want Royal blue :-)
--
Regards,
Dave Pawson
XSLT + Docbook FAQ
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
