[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: SERIOUS concerns about implementation



At 06:38 PM 02/20/97 -0600, len bullard wrote:

>> I aggree. But I *do* wish we could stop referring to SGML files as "legacy".
>> Surely SGML->XML is a "down-translation" not an "up-translation".

I don't think vertical terms are applicable. Since the element structures of
both forms are the same, I don't think there's vertical motion involved at all.

It would seem very odd to me to say that global changes of approximately

   <!--\([^-->]\)/-->    to    <!--*\1*-->

and 

   <?\([^>]\)>           to    <?\1?>

are "down-translation". They seem purely horizontal; certainly none of the
real information has changed; only the syntactic details of its
representation. Certainly we wouldn't call re-vamping an SGML file to use a
new delimiter set "down" or "up" translation; and that's all that's really
going on here (the only difference being a clearl trivial one, that SGML
doesn't presently let us change COMO and COMC separately).


Follow-Ups: