is there a media type for XSL-FO?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

is there a media type for XSL-FO?

Julian Reschke
Hi there,

see the subject line -- is there a media type for XSL-FO documents? (I
did check the XSL 1.1 spec, plus the IANA registry, but couldn't find
anything...)

Best regards, Julian

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: is there a media type for XSL-FO?

Arnd Beißner
A few years ago I was looking for the same thing and like you ended up empty. While XSL-FO as a formatting language is certainly an intermediary language that is rarely actually stored or requested, there are a few cases where one still wants a media type for it. The scenario I wanted it for was for storing reference documents for automated testing.

--
Arnd Beißner
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: is there a media type for XSL-FO?

Liam R. E. Quin
In reply to this post by Julian Reschke
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 14:03 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> see the subject line -- is there a media type for XSL-FO documents?

I don't believe so.

The original WG didn't anticipate that people would interchange XSL-FO
documents, but rather that they would interchange the XML input
documents, and would run XSLT as needed.

I think we should add a media type definition as XSL-FO 2 moves forward.
Do you have a reason for us to do it sooner?

Thanks,

Liam

--
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://www.fromoldbooks.org/
Occasional blog: http://www.barefootliam.org/
The barefoot typographer




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: is there a media type for XSL-FO?

Julian Reschke
On 2011-05-19 23:27, Liam R E Quin wrote:

> On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 14:03 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> see the subject line -- is there a media type for XSL-FO documents?
>
> I don't believe so.
>
> The original WG didn't anticipate that people would interchange XSL-FO
> documents, but rather that they would interchange the XML input
> documents, and would run XSLT as needed.

Indeed. They are exchanged rarely, but they are sometimes exchanged.

The question came up when discussing browser handling of
application/xslt+xml; the absence of a distinct type for FO, no matter
how seldom it would be useful, keeps confusing people.

> I think we should add a media type definition as XSL-FO 2 moves forward.
> Do you have a reason for us to do it sooner?

That of course depends on what "sooner" means :-) What's the timeline
for XSL-FO 2?

Thanks for the feedback,

Julian

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: is there a media type for XSL-FO?

Liam R. E. Quin
On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 23:36 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:

> > I think we should add a media type definition as XSL-FO 2 moves forward.
> > Do you have a reason for us to do it sooner?
>
> That of course depends on what "sooner" means :-) What's the timeline
> for XSL-FO 2?

Fair comment - we don't have a definite schedule; I'd like to see a last
call draft in the first half of next year.

Liam


--
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://www.fromoldbooks.org/
Occasional blog: http://www.barefootliam.org/
The barefoot typographer



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: is there a media type for XSL-FO?

Julian Reschke
On 2011-05-20 04:25, Liam R E Quin wrote:

> On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 23:36 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:
>
>>> I think we should add a media type definition as XSL-FO 2 moves forward.
>>> Do you have a reason for us to do it sooner?
>>
>> That of course depends on what "sooner" means :-) What's the timeline
>> for XSL-FO 2?
>
> Fair comment - we don't have a definite schedule; I'd like to see a last
> call draft in the first half of next year.

OK,

so this seems close enough to me.

Let me help if I can help writing the appendix with the type
registration. We should also try to get it out before LC for IETF review
(to avoid past mistakes :-).

Best regards, Julian