This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: FOO vs FO
- To: <xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com>
- Subject: Re: [xsl] FOO vs FO
- From: "cutlass" <cutlass at secure0 dot com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 13:04:03 +0100
- References: <6B3877B8D238D511852700B0D068CA9D906032@SH24X693>
- Reply-To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
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