Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
No. The first pass was based on RTF and then Anders Berglund stepped in along with Dan Connoly. They used a DTD others have mentioned. My original source on that was Yuri Rubinsky. HTML followed a development path common to markup applications: sprinkle and formalize; then redo and refactor. Nothing wrong with that. Markup owes many people. Read Goldfarb's history for an authoritative source. Hypertext is a technology that found its niche AFTER it became obsolete. Even now, inline anchors are something of a convenience, not a necessity. len From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@x...] >3/15/2002 5:01:49 PM, "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...> wrote: > >>If we had to invent XML from scratch, would it >>have mattered? If HTML had been invented from >>scratch, would it have succeeded? Also, a factual/historical question -- Wasn't HTML more or less "invented from scratch" and SGML used to legitimize it post hoc? That is, HTML arguably just latched on the the "markup" meme, not SGML in all its glory. Likewise, one could characterize the core ideas in XML as "HTML with a more rigid and easy-to-parse syntax, and with a flexible set of tags." Without SGML, something similar to HTML and XML would probably have come along by now... maybe with LISP-ish or troff-ish (shudder!) syntax. How violently would people who were in the hypertext world of ten years ago disagree?
|
