• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• To: Marcus Carr <mrc@a...>, Rod Davison <rdavison@s...>
• Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 08:28:52 -0500

Anyone familiar with the mil manuals of the 
period, the indexing such as structures for callouts, 
reference designators, the 87269 DB structures for 
IETMs knows SGML is about information capture in 
general, not just documents.  The topic of what is 
a document kept coming up and has been satisfactorily 
answered in the literature.  It was at its most interesting 
when implementors and designerd began to store SGML 
in relational DBs and discovered the problems of 
crushing rich structures into table structures.  It 
worked but it was awkward.

>>Rod Davison wrote:

>> SGML is designed for documention.

That's another Myth Of XML... SGML is more flexible, not less. 
SGML is the parent, the superset, and has more power than XML. 
The software cost more and so did the ad campaigns.  

Len 
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard

Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h


-----Original Message-----
From: Marcus Carr [mailto:mrc@a...]

While I agree with the rest of what Rod wrote, I think that the definition
above
might be a bit too narrow - I'd say that SGML was designed for information
capture. 

• Prev by Date: RE: Against the Grain: Pascal commentary about XML and databases
• Next by Date: RE: Data storage, data exchange, data manipulation
• Previous by thread: RE: XML and SGML
• Next by thread: RE: NAmespaces
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread