W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > November 1996

Re: Recent ERB votes

From: Paul Grosso <paul@arbortext.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 96 11:08:50 CST
Message-Id: <9611071708.AA08144@atiaus.arbortext.com>
To: W3C-SGML-WG@w3.org
> From: bosak@atlantic-83.Eng.Sun.COM (Jon Bosak)
> 
> Note also that this strategy does not discriminate against the
> existing SGML document base.  There are probably as many existing SGML
> documents that will work unchanged in an XML environment as there are
> HTML documents.  My Shakespeare and Religious Works collections are
> valid XML just as they stand

How is that?  How are empty elements represented in your existing SGML
document base for your Shakespeare and Religious Works collections?  

Irrespective of the answer to the above, what SGML authoring tools 
would produce valid XML given document instances in your Shakespeare 
and Religious Works collections?

Assuming neither Author/Editor nor Adept Editor (whose output, I
believe, are very similar) are answers to the above question, what
would be the list of modifications necessary to convert what they would
produce given document instances in your Shakespeare and Religious
Works collections into valid XML?
Received on Thursday, 7 November 1996 12:52:45 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 10:03:41 EDT