This is the mail archive of the xsl-list@mulberrytech.com mailing list .


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: FOO vs FO


FOO is from foobar, a military term

which means something like Fouled Up Beyond All Belief

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3092.txt

cheers, jim fuller

----- Original Message -----
From: "Hewko, Doug" <Doug.Hewko@ccra-adrc.gc.ca>
To: <xsl-list@lists.mulberrytech.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 12:58 PM
Subject: [xsl] FOO vs FO


> Does anyone know why FOO was chosen to mean anything?
>
> From the W3 site, in a message at
> "http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/msg00613.html";, someone
asked
> "What does foo.bar mean in CSS?". The response was:
>
> Ah, a puzzle!
>
> 1. The literal answer is probably not the answer the author is
> looking for.
>
> 2. `foo' and `bar' are commonly used as placeholders for arbitrary
> character strings.
>
> In XML Bible by E. Harold, page 52, the author says that FOO means
"whatever
> you want it to". Further down, on page 517, we find that for formatting
> objects, the defacto standard prefix is "FO".
>
> Why was FOO and FO chosen instead of something less confusing? I can
> understand FO for formatting objects, but why FOO? Why not XXX or ABC??
>
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
>


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]