W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > November 1999


From: <JOrendorff@ixl.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 11:52:12 -0500
Message-ID: <CD8E2CDBC6D0D111ACB900805FBBD97E01FCFEEC@mem-131.ixl.com>
To: www-html@w3.org
On Mon, 22 Nov 1999, Frank Boumphrey wrote:
> > SGML based HTML responds too slowly to change, with XML 
> based XHTML it will
> > be possible for interested parties to create their own 
> subsets and add them
> > to XHTML.

Russell Steven Shawn O'Connor replied:
> What a silly statement.  It would be just as easy for HTML to 
> evolve in SGML as it is in XML.  No one is forcing you to use
> one Document Type Declaration.  Arguably you can't really do
> that anyway.  That's why architecture forms exist.

It doesn't seem to me that your statement addresses Frank's
statement.  Unless I'm mistaken, Frank is talking about custom
extensions; and you seem to be referring to the evolution of
HTML proper.

I think XML is better-suited to extension (in the sense of
extending a standard "schema" with your own element types, or
embedding data of one type in a document of another type) than
SGML, but I'm no expert.

What is the SGML feature that one would use for similar
semantics as XML namespaces provide?

Is there existing SGML work that does what XML Schemas aims
to do?

-- Jason
Received on Tuesday, 23 November 1999 11:52:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:51 UTC