draft notice text

[Dave Pawson]

On Sat, 2004-09-18 at 19:19, Mark Johnson wrote:

> 
> This is the hope, anyway. FDP certainly provides an excellent test 
> case for a given toolchain.
> 
> However, we may end up with something entirely different, like a 
> java-based system.
> 
> We may, e.g., decide that Saxon is more appropriate as an XSLT 
> processor (due to its docbook & other extensions), and that FOP is 
> adequate for our FO --> PDF needs, instead of having to revert to 
> the tried & true jade/DSSSL combo for PDF output. XSLT and XSL-FO 
> are simply easier to deal with than is DSSSL.
+1.
  Which xslt engine is almost immaterial till we move on to xslt 2.0.
I've preferred Saxon simply because it appears closer to the 1.0 rec.
Apache Xalan is perfectly suited though.

> 
> At any rate, we won't be committing to any new toolchain (and 
> changing all RHEL docs over to XML) until after RHEL4 is released.

Which 'we' Mark?
  



-- 
Regards DaveP.
XSLT&Docbook  FAQ
http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl