:D Thanks for the laugh Robert! And for bringing things into perspective.
This is really what I am trying to get to the bottom of... Does this
really matter to the XSL* communities as a whole. If yes, then any
extended work I do in this area should keep this in mind... if no...
then no worries... If there are areas that I personally feel like are
beneficial, then I must make any decisions in regards to work I do in
this area based on my own opinions desires. If, however, there are
folks that feel like this is beneficial work in a broader sense of the
word, then I need to keep this in mind as well, and act accordingly.
Thanks for your comments... You definitely know how to say it like it
is :D (a good thing, in my opinon :D)
On 6/3/06, Robert Koberg <rob(_at_)koberg(_dot_)com> wrote:
M. David Peterson wrote:
> And yes... I still do VERY MUCH have a question....
>
> Does direct support for PDF as part of Office dilute or enhance the
> value of XSL-FO?
For me, I hope the whole PDF document type dies a quick death. Perhaps
what you are talking about helps it.
Have you ever tried to convert PDFs (especially PDFs produced by many
different people) to something usable for XSL processing? I have often
fantasized about taking PDF out back and shooting it.
(for that that matter, to a lesser extent, I hope MS Office Word and
Open Office Write dies a similar death)
-Rob
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--
--
<M:D/>
M. David Peterson
http://www.xsltblog.com/
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--