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

Re: SGML complexity (was: RE: Re: Recognizing...)

• From: sterling <sstouden@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
• To: Tatu Saloranta <cowtowncoder@xxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 07:52:55 -0500 (CDT)

Seems to me, xml users have developed the sophistication to be 
able to become SGML users and developers. Could SGML do all of 
the work that has been thus far done by all of its sublanguages? 

Maybe time to tackle SGML and get rid of ml soup oflanguages.

I extract and question the comments made below as follows:

On Tue, 29 Aug 2006, Tatu Saloranta wrote:

> --- Len Bullard <cbullard@h...> wrote:
> 
> > "The complaint is SGML has a lot of features"

 my question but does it not have everything everyone
 needs?

> > "fully-conforming system is expensive"  

   my question is this not just a volume issue?
> 
> "The other side to complexity"

my question=
   is the need just tools and qualified developers 
   to write them inorder to get on std for everyone 
   on both sides users and developers?

> -+ Tatu +-
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: SGML complexity (was: RE: Re: Recognizing...)
    • From: Tatu Saloranta

• References:
  • SGML complexity (was: RE: Re: Recognizing...)
    • From: Tatu Saloranta