[xsl] FO Comparison to HTML and PDF

["Raul Rodriguez" <raulnyc at hotmail dot com>]

Hi

I would like to get your opinions about something I am selling to senior 
management.

I am putting together a white paper advocating FO to be used in our products 
and services.  For the layperson, I wrote a section called, "How Does FO 
Compare to PDF and HTML?" and made this scale diagram


Content <=====================================> Fidelity
       |                |                    |
      HTML              FO                   PDF


What I am saying is that FO sits betweeen PDF and HTML.  Whereas HTML is 
more content oriented, the image fidelity of the documents are very
difficult to control.  With PDF which is more image oriented, managing and 
accessing the content is not very good.  FO provides the best of both worlds 
because I can manage the content and then produce high fidelity documents.

Since I am new to FO (2 months), I am not sure if this is a good
representation.  I have read that with FO, I can position content anywhere I 
want but I have not seen that much evidence in that and certainly it does 
not seem as precise as PDF.  Also since FO is an intermidate format and 
lacks a native browser, it might be proper to compare it to these two 
formats.

Your opinions are most appreciated.

Thanks

Raul



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list