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

RE: SV: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: SV: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 13:18:38 -0600

Not real sure what is meant here, but IADS has 
and always has had a well-formed SGML approach 
that formatted "on the fly".  It is still out 
there working.  It uses a stylesheet driven 
approach.

This is a concern for anyone?  The format on 
the fly issue was settled years ago.  I think some 
folks draw all their SGML history from the 
batch print community.  If so, you are missing 
the important lessons.  Unfortunately, a lot 
of the SGML hypertext work (not EBT) was done 
on the military side.  Panorama was such a 
latecomer to SGML hypertext, it barely mattered; 
it was, also unfortunately, an SGML community 
darling.  If survival is "what matters", IADS 
survived in its niche.

len

From: Daniel Veillard [mailto:veillard@r...]

Possibly, but the end result is there, some bug or performances problems
get fixed, others don't. I was arguing against  a statement that XML was 
pure hype and less sophisticated. It may be hype but there is more
implementations to choose from, it may be less sophisticated but in practice
things which were looking impossible with the previous toolchain becomes
possible like formatting on the fly upon user request. One could probably
had done that on SGML too, but not with free software apparently. The 
sophistication trade-off have a serious impact in that area.

• Prev by Date: RE: SV: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"
• Next by Date: Re: yet another distraction...
• Previous by thread: Re: SV: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"
• Next by thread: Enhanced SGML to XML conversion based on SP tools
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread