Subject: RE: [docbook] Whatever happened too CSS+XML?
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 . >As Bob Stayton says : > > "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 , 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