While exploring the W3C site today, I came across an interesting document
An XHTML + MathML + SVG Profile
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-XHTMLplusMathMLplusSVG-20020430/
This is one document that describes a profile containing parts of 3 other W3C
Recommendations. This would seem to be proof that the W3C could potentially
handle something like:
XHTML + CSS: A Profile for Printing
Maybe separating these parts is NOT going to be required for eventual W3C
submission.
**********************************************
Don Wright don at lexmark.com
Member, IEEE SA Standards Board
Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors
f.wright at ieee.org / f.wright at computer.org
Director, Alliances & Standards
Lexmark International
740 New Circle Rd
Lexington, Ky 40550
859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax)
**********************************************
"GRANT,MELINDA (HP-Vancouver,ex1)" <melinda_grant%hp.com at interlock.lexmark.com>
on 05/28/2002 12:20:55 PM
To: xp%pwg.org at interlock.lexmark.com
cc: (bcc: Don Wright/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject: RE: XP> New XHTML-Print Version
I've been thinking some about the document organization question, and I'd
like to float a proposal:
We replace the current specification document with a family of three
documents:
1. An XHTML-Print specification. This would not include the CSS
requirements or tutorials that are in the current spec. A rough first pass
example is attached.
2. A CSS-Print specification, ala CSS-Mobile recommendation and
CSS-TV draft proposal. I believe the W3C CSS group has indicated their
interest in helping to develop this spec.
3. A specification describing the
application/vnd.pwg-xhtml-print+xml MIME media type. This would tie all the
requirements together, pointing to the XHTML-Print and CSS-Print specs,
adding the JPEG requirement, multiplexed discussion, tutorials, etc.
Motivations:
1. Since we're using W3C-based standards, align our approach with
that taken by the W3. This will make it easier for people familiar with w3
standards to quickly assimilate the mapping to printing.
2. It will also facilitate conversations and interactions with
members of the w3.
3. The current name, XHTML-Print, isn't really accurate since it
includes much more than just XHTML.
Thoughts?
Melinda
-----Original Message-----
From: don at lexmark.com [mailto:don at lexmark.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 1:19 PM
To: xp at pwg.org
Subject: XP> New XHTML-Print Version
Since we have a long term goal of moving the XHTML-Print work to the W3C, I
have
converted the Word document to HTML in the style of the W3C.
Please review:
http://www.pwg.org/xhtml-print/HTML-Version/XHTML-Print.html
and let me know what you think. I have not started the work of considering
how
to split the document into an XHTML part and a CSS part yet because I think
we
need to discuss if that is the right move to make. That discussion should,
of
course, be on this list.
Please identify any errors in the HTML version (getting all the cross
references
to the Bibliography was a challenge!!) as soon as possible. Use at least
Netscape 6.1 or IE 5.5 to see the correct styling.
Thanks!
**********************************************
Don Wright don at lexmark.com
Member, IEEE SA Standards Board
Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors
f.wright at ieee.org / f.wright at computer.org
Director, Alliances & Standards
Lexmark International
740 New Circle Rd
Lexington, Ky 40550
859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax)
**********************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.pwg.org/archives/xp/attachments/20020529/b2d63d32/xhtml-print_sans_css-0001.htm