Off-topic (was Re: Encoded rendering instructions (was Unicode's Mandate))

From: Mark Davis (
Date: Thu Mar 10 2005 - 15:27:36 CST

  • Next message: Gregg Reynolds: "Re: Off-topic (was Re: Encoded rendering instructions (was Unicode's Mandate))"

    Not according to what I have heard from a number of experts in SGML / XML
    whom I respect: apparently because of the complexity of SGML, there has
    never existed a parser that was fully conformant to the SGML spec. I believe
    that was one of the main motivating factors behind XML, to make a fully
    specified, easily implementable 'subset' of SGML.


    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Marion Gunn" <>
    Cc: <>
    Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 11:48
    Subject: Re: Encoded rendering instructions (was Unicode's Mandate)

    > Dear God, I cut my teeth on SGML over 20 yrs ago (that was in purely
    > academic circles, which we must can add to Philippe's 'edition and news
    > industries' ref. below). SGML still wins hands down over everything else
    > for stability, robustness, reversibility, platform-independence and
    > longevity (or so I believe).
    > mg
    > Scríobh Philippe Verdy:
    > > ...
    > >
    > > Yes but XML is not the only choice. You can create non strictly
    > > markup with SGML instead of XML.
    > >
    > > SGML parsing is much more complicate than XML, but SGML has been used
    > > much longer in the edition and news industries, and it allows creating
    > > several parallel hierarchies on the same document.
    > >
    > > With XML, the only way to do that is to split the document into as many
    > > nodes as needed, give them each a distinct id, and then create separate
    > > hierarchies with references to the actual node ids....
    > --
    > Marion Gunn * EGTeo (Estab.1991)
    > 27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn, Baile an
    > Bhóthair, Co. Átha Cliath, Éire.
    > * * *

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Mar 10 2005 - 15:28:48 CST