RE: [docbook-apps] Re: Simpler XHTML output

["Peter Ring" <PRI at magnus dot dk>]

The current HTML/XHTML output is designed with current/deprecated web
browsers as constraints, i.e., for immediate consumption. There's room
for another format designed for interchange and further processing, with
no consideration for broken or deprecated browsers.

Open eBook OEBPS 1.2 is an application of XHTML 1.1 that could serve as
an example of an XHTML-based interchange format:

http://www.openebook.org/oebps/oebps1.2/index.htm

kind regards
Peter Ring


> -----Original Message-----
> From: John L. Clark [mailto:jlc6@po.cwru.edu]
> Sent: 26. april 2005 22:53
> To: docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [docbook-apps] Re: Simpler XHTML output
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 11:36:17AM -0400, Norman Walsh wrote:
> > I'm not sure what the right answer is...
> 
> > I'd be reluctant to make large changes to the current HTML output
> > as there are *a lot* of pages out there that may rely on the current
> > functionality.
> 
> I think this is quite reasonable...
> 
> > I'd be reluctant to fork the XHTML stylesheets and maintain them
> > separately from the HTML stylesheets.
> 
> ... but this I don't understand.  There are clearly different profiles
> of HTML; the existence of xhtml is merely one dimension of that
> profiling.  There are also certainly a lot of options for controlling
> output from the current (x)html stylesheets.  I think that 
> even with all
> of these options, though, the current stylesheets really only 
> output one
> profile, which is "in spirit" similar to xhtml-transitional.  I think
> forking the current HTML sources to create a new profile (along the
> lines of xhtml-strict) would address some of the desire for
> structurally-rich, CSS-controlled xhtml output.
> 
> Here's the directory structure I imagine:
> 
>   ...
>   html                  Currently supported html output
>   xhtml-transitional    Automatically generated from html; corresponds
>                         to the current 'xhtml' directory
>   xhtml-strict          Completely different profile supporting
>                         "structural" xhtml with hooks for CSS
> 
> I think that this last profile should be treated as an independent
> module of the stylesheets because it has such different design
> considerations.  It will probably share some core functionality (and
> hence, code) in common with the current HTML output stylesheets.
> Perhaps that is the reason for the hesitation in forking, but I would
> hope that such common code could be independently managed (e.g. in an
> xhtml-common directory that could be automatically generated from a
> subset of the html code).
> 
> Take care,
> 
>     John L. Clark
> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-apps-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docbook-apps-help@lists.oasis-open.org