RE: [docbook] Whatever happened too CSS+XML?

["Peter Ring" <PRI@magnus.dk>]

> 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 beg to differ that we differ ... (or something).

If we have

- mean clean lean XHTML that accurately represent
  the rendering *intention* without messing with
  the actual rendition

- a modular CSS that reflects the *types* of
  rendition intention, take advantage of the
  'Cascading' in CSS and some way to represent 
  property groups

it is piece of cake to change fonts, colors, margins, 
linking behaviour, etc. in a typographically consistent 
manner.

The classic showpiece is css Zen Garden:

  http://www.csszengarden.com/

Another example that demonstrate what CSS can accomplish
in a dramatic fashion:

  http://www.themaninblue.com/writing/


The main point of using CSS is actually that you can get rough 
and ready output for a website, while I re-purpose the same XHTML
for an e-book, and someone else syndicates the content into a 
glossy weblog.


kind regards
Peter Ring


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Pawson [mailto:davep@dpawson.co.uk]
> Sent: 9. november 2005 18:15
> To: Peter Ring
> Cc: DocBook
> 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 [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
> 
>