Re: Syntax highlighting

[Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>]

"Jan Tosovsky" <j.tosovsky@email.cz> writes:
> While I don't plan to upgrade my generating workflow to XSL 2.0 stylesheets
> in the near future, I am quite curious whether the proposed HTML+CSS
> approach can really cover all common needs:
>
> 1. ToC and Index with page numbers
> 2. Bookmarks
> 3. Double-sided version (different recto/verso margins, header/footer
> content)
> 4. Running header-footers (differences amongst title, blank or recto/verso
> pages)
> 5. Absolute positioning of title page graphics or other page elements
> 6. Using PDF format for images
> 7. Change bars

Some of those things are easy, some not so easy. But I expect they can
all be done. Not from the stock HTML stylesheets that you'd use on the
web, but from a HTML-for-print stylesheet. I hear that O'Reilly now
uses HTML+CSS for their print books.

The reality is that free XSL FO tools never really matured. The
commercial ones all work, but all have extensions to handle things
that weren't fully specified.

There's a large community focused on HTML+CSS+JS these days. It seems
more likely (to me) that free HTML+CSS print tools will come along
before greatly improved free XSL FO tools. Especially since future work
on XSL FO has largely been abandoned.

There are commercial HTML+CSS print formatters today that seem to be
comparable to the XSL FO ones. AntennaHouse supports both and
PrinceXML seems to do a competent job.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | Everything that irritates us about
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | others can lead us to an
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | understanding of ourselves.--Carl
                                   | Jung

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature