- From: Martin Bryan <mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 10:54:23 +0100
- To: Bill Lindsey <blindsey@bdmtech.com>, Michael Sperberg-McQueen <U35395@UICVM.CC.UIC.EDU>
- Cc: W3C SGML Working Group <w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org>
At 05:17 AM 17/9/96 +0100, Bill Lindsey wrote: >Is it a design goal to ensure that some percentage of today's >SGML documents are "grandfathered" in, or is it enough that the >EE-ESIS translation is available? If it is the former case, >how do we decide which class(es) of documents shall be supported? The set of documents I would like to see "grandfathered in" is that set defined in (valid) HTML. If an XML browser cannot read that set of raw HTML documents that are valid according to the 2.0 DTD (or later versions) then it will not be of much practical use, and will be ignored by the majority of potential users. (We would still have the problem of the 60% of invalid documents, but hopefully this situation will get better once standard WP tools start offering automatic conversion to HTML.) Martin Bryan ---- Martin Bryan, The SGML Centre, Churchdown, Glos. GL3 2PU, UK Phone/Fax: +44 1452 714029 WWW home page: http://www.u-net.com/~sgml/
Received on Tuesday, 17 September 1996 06:04:54 UTC