[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Grove diagram (was Re: The Power of Groves)

• From: Len Bullard <cbullard@h...>
• To: "W. Eliot Kimber" <eliot@i...>
• Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 18:58:57 -0600

W. Eliot Kimber wrote:
> 
> It's important to remember that XML simplified SGML *syntax*. It did not
> (and could not) simplify the underlying abstract data model (except
> where the SGML data model reflects optional features, like attributes
> for notations).
> 
> This is why the idea that XML is *fundamentally* simpler that SGML is a
> Big Lie. The cost of entry is lower, but the total cost of ownership is
> essentially the same.

Good call, E.  However, let's also remember that a strength of SGML, 
I usually simply say markup systems these days, is that given some
lifecycle 
value, the trend is for cost to go down when compared to other systems.

len

• References:
  • The Power of Groves
    • From: Steve Schafer <pandeng@t...>
  • Re: The Power of Groves
    • From: "W. Eliot Kimber" <eliot@i...>
  • Re: The Power of Groves
    • From: Len Bullard <cbullard@h...>
  • Re: The Power of Groves
    • From: "W. Eliot Kimber" <eliot@i...>
  • Re: The Power of Groves
    • From: Len Bullard <cbullard@h...>
  • Re: The Power of Groves
    • From: "W. Eliot Kimber" <eliot@i...>
  • Re: The Power of Groves
    • From: Peter Murray-Rust <peter@u...>
  • Re: Grove diagram (was Re: The Power of Groves)
    • From: Peter Murray-Rust <peter@u...>
  • Re: Grove diagram (was Re: The Power of Groves)
    • From: "W. Eliot Kimber" <eliot@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Schema concepts
• Next by Date: Re: The Power of Groves
• Previous by thread: Re: Grove diagram (was Re: The Power of Groves)
• Next by thread: Re: Grove diagram (was Re: The Power of Groves)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread