[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] 5.3.1 Note Element
Michael, I think the steps you have taken are the best we can do to reduce the likelihood of confusion. Should get back to proofing late today. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick Michael Brauer wrote: > Patrick, > > Patrick Durusau wrote: > >> Greetings, >> >> 5.3.1 Note Element (second paragraph) reads: >> >>> Open Office XML represents notes in a similar fashion to footnotes in >>> XSL. In XSL, the first child of the note element contains the citation >>> in the form of an <fo:inline> element. Open Office XML uses the same >>> structure but introduces a <text:note-citation> element. The second >>> child contains the note body, just as in XSL. >> >> >> >> Confused when I first read this paragraph. Since XSL divided into XSLT >> and XSL:FO, would it be clearer to substitute XSL:FO? Granted that I >> think the language is technically correct, just not sure that it won't >> cause confusion. > > > I agree that it is a little but confusing that the former XSL has been > divided into XSLT and XSL-FO first, and XSL-FO has been renamed to XSL > later. However, the current specification is called "XSL" and FO or > "formatting objects" even does not appear in its title. So, from my > point of view, it might also be confusing to use XSL-FO for people that > don't know the history of XSL. So "XSL" seems to be the correct term, > even if it might be confusing. > > Anyway, the sepcifiaction sometimes refered to XSL (FO) as XSL, and > sometimes as XSL-FO, and the bibliography entry was called [xsl-fo], > too. This in fact is confusing and inconsistent. For reason, I've > renamed the the bibliography entry to [XSL] and the term "XSL-FO" to > "XSL". Whenever "XSL" occured first in a section, I've replaced it with > the bibliography entry "[XSL]", so that it becomes clear that we are > refering to XSL and not to XSLT at least after heaving a look at the > bibliography index. > > At the same time I've found to places there we refered to XSLT as XSL: > One was in section 6.7.8 were we refer to XSLT number formats, the other > in section 14 were had "CSS or XSL stylesheets". > > Does that work for you? > > Michael > > -- Patrick Durusau Director of Research and Development Society of Biblical Literature Patrick.Durusau@sbl-site.org Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]