W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > November 1996

SGML on the web (was: when will CSS rule)

From: <papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 19:07:15 -0500
Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961121000715.00c4df80@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
To: "Carl Morris" <msftrncs@htcnet.com>, "WWW Style List" <www-style@w3.org>
At 05:18 PM 11/20/96 -0600, Carl Morris wrote:
>| Yes. POEM tags have extra benefits over <div class=poem>.  
>|  * they are more compact to type and download. 
>
>It would require a DTD, a DTD is not compact to type and download.

That isn't the case. See http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/TR/WD-xml-961114.html
section 3.2 DTDs are no longer required.

>
>|  * they are easier to work with programmatically. Most SGML/HTML
>search
>| engines/transformation tools/parsers/formatters/ whatever are "keyed"
>on
>| element name. Doing work based on attributes tend to be harder. 
>
>Key on element, or key on class... do what ever you want, theres no
>limitation other than some programmers sallary...

That is also not the case. There already *exist* products that work with
element names. Some people already *have* them. Therefore the difference is
using what you have, or buying all new software to support a silly hack.
Some software systems for working with generic markup are VERY expensive.

>| HTML is not necessarily easier to use, parse OR render than a
>"simple" SGML.
>| Note that ["simple" SGML] is now a World Wide Web Consortium
>standard.
>
>Yes it is, part of HTML is the mild rules used to render it... SGML is
>just content, content, content, NO STYLE!  the world doesn't work
>without style...  At least I am not going to look at just content...

Wrong again. HTML *is* SGML. Therefore it is obviously possible to make
SGML-based languages that are "all style" or "part style" or "all content",
depending on your preference. Considering the gross, complex HTML code
required to do some things, I think it makes a lot of sense to make
format-oriented SGML-based languages for format-oriented sites.

>| >However, by SGML I think all people mean is content
>| >validation... 
>| 
>| That isn't at all true. You've missed the point of SGML altogether.
>| 
>| SGML is about allowing end users to take control of the data format
>of their
>| documents. Documents are important, the knowledge inside of them is
>vital
>
>IE, validate content! Thats allow it allows a third party to do!

This is *not* an accurate paraphrase of my paragraph above which does not
mention validation at all. Let me say it again. It is useful to use SGML in
situations where you *never* intend to validate *anything.* Usually,
however, once people move to SGML they figure they might as well take
advantage of all of its features, instead of half of them. That will
probably change if it becomes the lingua franca of the Web.

  Paul Prescod
---
Boycott Shell Oil worldwide!  http://www.web.apc.org/embargo/shell.htm    

"Shell is here on trial and it is as well that it is represented by counsel
said to be holding a watching brief."..."The ecological war that the Company
has waged in the Delta will be called to question sooner than later." -Ken
Saro-Wiwa to the tribunal that later executed him.
http://www.gem.co.za/ELA/ken.html
Received on Wednesday, 20 November 1996 19:05:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:53:46 GMT