Re: Will XML go beyond SGML Users?

Ralph Ferris wrote:
> 
> You wrote:
> 
> >As I understood it, it was our goal that all browsers should support XML
> >just as they do HTML. Since even Internet Explorer cannot open either RTF or
> >Word files,
> 
> Internet Explorer 3.0 can open any ActiveX enabled control, including Word.
> Word (or Excel, or whatever) will then take over the entire client viewing
> area, adding its own toolbar, i.e., there is seemless integration within the
> original window. It's also worth noting that URLs are now recognized in
> non-HTML documents (some mail systems support this feature as well). 
And Word can now open Web documents.  Sure has improved printing. ;-)

>So Word
> users do not need to convert their documents in order to post them to the
> Web. Conversely, what user's think of as the browser has been de-coupled
> from the formats it reads. An ActiveX control can be created to support any
> document markup. So a new markup could be created and popularized, not by
> creating a dedicated browser that supports it, but by supplying an ActiveX
> control that supports it. XML could be introduced to the market in this way.

Right.  Welcome to framework design:  to the notations, and beyond!

The trick is, an XML viewer that just renders XML isn't as interesting 
an XML-handler that understands/inteprets other semantics of the XML
elements.

IOW, not just AN active-X, but lots of them, some dedicated to 
very simple XML aggregates.  XML, IMO, allows us to send 
property values where some properties are complex as could be
the case for a nest.  Anyway, the Active X way is one way.  
It is a solid commercial way.  VRML (which is actually 
an object language), so far is having a devil of a time 
with the issue of that interface.  Best we leave it for 
the next phase.

Yes,  XML will go beyond SGML users, but because we 
are letting it go beyond SGML.  We will find a lot 
of the same users.  Heck, that's us.

len

Received on Monday, 30 September 1996 23:25:18 UTC