RE: which came first: content or markup?
And that is not a good view unless one is constraining a priori. You may not have been around for the early rounds of the debates between WYSIWYG and SGML systems. It was claimed that WYSIWYG was better because it enabled free text entry. The conflict was that the market that could afford the then expensive WYSIWYG systems needed constrained documents. Internally, a WYSIWYG looks a lot like HTML (or RTF). This gave some of the SGML editors their first boost. The ones that did well also had a way to relax the markup constraint. One turned it on as one needed it. Because information arrived out of order relative to the document structure, one had to relax that constraint. Validation doesn't have to be on all the time. If XML editors are forcing it to be on all the time, another history lesson was missed. That one is mystifying because anyone with experience knows it. This is the data-centric, database-first viewpoint fumbling the ball. Database systems want schemas a priori. len From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@s...] A content-first view doesn't seem very popular in the XML world at present, and I can't say I see that changing. Markup now seems to come first.
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format