Re: equivalent power in SGML and XML
At 12:56 PM 17/9/96 +0100, James Clark wrote:
>> The set of documents I would like to see "grandfathered in" is that set
>> defined in (valid) HTML.
>I just don't think this is practical. HTML relies OMITTAG (notably
>for P, LI, DT, DD). I don't see how we can possibly achieve our ease
>of implementation goals if we support OMITTAG in XML.
As currently discussed it would not be possible with XML - this gives me a
>> If an XML browser cannot read that set of raw HTML
>> documents that are valid according to the 2.0 DTD (or later versions) then
>> it will not be of much practical use, and will be ignored by the majority of
>> potential users.
>I don't need to use an XML browser to browse HTML; I've already got
>plenty of HTML browsers that do that just fine.
Yes, but if its a choice between viewing a few documents on XML, a huge
number on HTML and even more on SGML I'm going to stick with HTML/SGML and
forget all about XML. Unless XML browsers can reference and display HTML
documents they are not going to form worthwhile information management
tools! What I want XML to do is to provide me with all the good stuff (and
none of the sloppy stuff) that HTML provides while allowing me to extend the
basic concepts beyond the limits currently set by W3C.
Martin Bryan, The SGML Centre, Churchdown, Glos. GL3 2PU, UK
Phone/Fax: +44 1452 714029 WWW home page: http://www.u-net.com/~sgml/