HTML is not SMGL

Dan Connolly (connolly@pixel.convex.com)
Sun, 07 Jun 92 00:12:55 CDT

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Dan Connolly: "overkill on portability macros"
Previous message: Dan Connolly: "<ISINDEX> and anchor types"
Next in thread: Jean Francois Groff: "Re: HTML is not SMGL"

Message-Id: <9206070512.AA17832@pixel.convex.com>
To: www-talk@nxoc01.cern.ch
Subject: HTML is not SMGL
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 92 00:12:55 CDT
From: Dan Connolly <connolly@pixel.convex.com>

My grandiose scheme to convert HTML to MIME and SGML
works fine.

Now I'm going back to the idea of writing a DTD for
the existing HTML format. I can't seem to do it.
HTML has so little rigid structure that I'm running
into mixed content problems (I have to allow #PCDATA
almost anywhere, hence mixed content, which screws
up everything).

How much extant HTML is really out there? And how
much of it is generated on the fly by gateways
and servers?

This MIME/SGML stuff sure seems like the way to go.

Now if I make it possible to create such documents
with FrameMaker and a perl script, I bet it will
catch on. I suspect I'll get some resistance against
abandoning UDI's, but I don't think they work.

Dan

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Dan Connolly: "overkill on portability macros"
Previous message: Dan Connolly: "<ISINDEX> and anchor types"
Next in thread: Jean Francois Groff: "Re: HTML is not SMGL"