Re: Second International Symposium on Invisible XML

On 18/08/2026 15:01, Bethan Tovey-Walsh wrote:
> I don't object to the change in principle, but currently there are a
> lot of people doing IXML and not a lot of people doing "invisible
> markup". 

I started talking explicitly about "markup" many years ago because so 
much of I what I deal with is not XML but LaTeX or some other system; 
but only when talking with people outside those two main arenas: among 
XML people I still talk about XML, and among LaTeX people I still talk 
about LaTeX.

Perhaps we should start using "markup" instead of "iXML" outside the 
immediate iXML/XML/SGML/LaTeX/etc communities.

> My concern when we talked about this for the first Symposium was
> about whether the term "invisible markup" really means anything to
> people 

I just use plaintext as the example with CAPS for headings and mixed 
case for paragraphs. I had a lovely example, now sadly lost, of a 1970s 
programme for an early evening organ concert on the South Bank (London) 
which was done with an IBM Selectric (golfball) typewriter, using CAPS, 
mixed-case, and very precise spacing to convey unambiguously everything 
you needed to know about the evening's music. I should probably try to 
construct a version as an example.

> (It does also seem weird to me that someone who would be interested 
> in markup is *not at all* interested in XML. But I have met humans, 
> and "weird" seems to be the one thing that they all have in common.)

I probably resemble that remark :-)

Peter

Received on Wednesday, 19 August 2026 15:03:34 UTC