Re: Moving on...

James Tauber (jtauber@library.uwa.edu.au)
Wed, 8 May 1996 22:26:53 +0800 (WST)


Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 22:26:53 +0800 (WST)
From: James Tauber <jtauber@library.uwa.edu.au>
To: Paul Prescod <papresco@itrc.uwaterloo.ca>
Cc: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: Moving on...
In-Reply-To: <199605081328.JAA20078@itrc.uwaterloo.ca>
Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960508221303.2633A-100000@docker.library.uwa.edu.au>

On Wed, 8 May 1996, Paul Prescod wrote:
> What if we started with TEI Lite or Docbook, instead, and turned that into a
> standards-track RFC? Or what if we didn't choose a particular SGML DTD at
> all, but went for a flexible SGML architecture instead? As Dan has been
> implying, the problem doesn't lie with W3C, its with those of us that expect
> them to do the work we do not want to (or cannot afford to do) ourselves.
> Instead of griping, (okay, in addition to griping... =) ) we need a plan. We
> need to organize. We need to get down to work.

Agreed. I would go for a general SGML solution based on one or both of:

	DSSSL-O
		DSSSL is very well done and DSSSL-O is a tractable
		subset to implement.

	Java as an SGML Processor
		Use processing instructions to map generic identifiers
		to Java classes that extend an abstract Element class
		that has parsing and rendering methods.

I am still trying to find the time to modify a Scheme interpreter to 
handle the DSSSL Core Expression Language. Help wanted.

James