On Fri, 2014-06-13 at 21:07 +0000, Eliot Kimber ekimber(_at_)contrext(_dot_)com
wrote:
I'm happy to be proven wrong on my no-FO-in-publishing assertion
I don't know if it's wrong so much as a different perspective on the
same data.
Some sources...
* XSL-FO renderer vendors having increased sales in the publishing area;
* consultants to publishers, and publishers themselves, attending XSL-FO
related events (markupforum, XML Prague, W3C Workhops on publishing)
* public presentations at said events
E.g. Hachette has moved from XSL-FO to XHTML + CSS so they can share CSS
between epub and print more easily; Penguin said at the XSL-Fo meetup in
Prague a couple of years ago that they used XSL-Fo for all of their
mostly-text/prose books such as fiction; that's two of the Big Six (or
Big N) right there.
Similarly at JATS-Con (a conference for STM journal publishers) there
were quite a few Antenna House users, enough that Antenna House staff
were there.
W3C has been relatively active in publishing (both print and epub) in
the past year or so.
I do have additional data that I can't share (sorry) but maybe others
can contribute some.
Liam
--
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml
--~----------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
EasyUnsubscribe: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/unsub/xsl-list/1167547
or by email: xsl-list-unsub(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
--~--