public inbox for docbook-tools-discuss@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
To: David Mason <dcm@redhat.com>
Cc: docbook-tools-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else?
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 06:36:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7453-Wed23Feb2000110215-0500-ndw@nwalsh.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200002231540.KAA08528@devserv.devel.redhat.com>

/ David Mason <dcm@redhat.com> was heard to say:
| > While true, I think that's a somewhat misleading statement.
| > DocBook 5.0 will be an XML DTD, but XML *is* SGML, so
| > it will be an SGML DTD as well. :-)
| 
| While true, ;) XML is becoming more and more its own beast in more
| ways than one. The simple fact that our current tools don't handle it
| well makes it *in reality* something different for the poor souls who
| had to move from starting things off with <!DOCTYPE Book PUBLIC
| "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook V4.0//EN"[]> to <?xml version="1.0"
| standalone="no"?>.

There are some authoring changes (system identifiers, empty tag
syntax, etc.), but the only thing the tools have to do
differently is pass an appropriate SGML declaration to, e.g.,
Jade.

| And on the *nix platforms we don't have it as easy as those of you on
| MS related products as we have no good tools to process XML
| (IMHO). Sure jade handles it to some extent, even against dsssl, but
| it doesn't handle XSL... There are a few java based tools available
| but the java engines for *nix stink thanks to Sun... Someone has
| threatened to put XSL support in Mozilla but backed down at the last
| second..

Huh? Jade and the Java based XSL tools ought to be damn near the
same.  If you're referring to IE5 support for XSL, it's so badly
broken that it's just about useless. (Worse than useless, in fact.)

I'm doing everything I do with XML using Jade and XT. Well,
except for editing which I sometimes use, um, Arbortext products
for, no surprise, and they aren't available for Linux (more's
the pity) but they sure are available for Unix.

| So tell me in my *real world* setting how similar XML is to SGML
| despite its continual claim that it is merely a 'subset' of SGML. If
| it was just that why does XSL have to come along? why do new tools
| have to be written? etc.

I'll save some of my wilder theories for a chat over a beer some
night, but the simpler answer is that the new tools are coming
along because XML is easier to process than SGML. XML is mostly
marketing.

New tools *don't have to be written*. All your existing SGML
tools work just fine.

| But despite all that, the thrust of my argument was that I don't want
| yet another project called DocBook Tools! (which is not a DTD)

I'm staying out of that one. :-)

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | Fast. Cheap. Well. Pick two.
http://nwalsh.com/                 | 

  reply	other threads:[~2000-12-27  6:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <951281049.19725.ezmlm@sourceware.cygnus.com>
2000-12-27  6:36 ` Horacio MG
2000-12-27  6:36   ` Jorge Godoy
2000-12-27  6:36   ` Re : " Eric Bischoff
2000-12-27  6:36     ` Jochem Huhmann
2000-12-27  6:36       ` Eric Bischoff
2000-12-27  6:36         ` Jochem Huhmann
2000-12-27  6:36           ` Evolution of the DocBook tools Eric Bischoff
2000-12-27  6:36           ` Eric Bischoff
2000-12-27  6:36             ` Jorge Godoy
2000-12-27  6:36             ` Jorge Godoy
2000-12-27  6:36           ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Eric Bischoff
2000-12-27  6:36             ` New list (was Re: Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else?) Jorge Godoy
2000-12-27  6:36               ` Jochem Huhmann
2000-12-27  6:36               ` Jorge Godoy
2000-12-27  6:36             ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Jochem Huhmann
2000-12-27  6:36               ` Eric Bischoff
2000-12-27  6:36           ` Eric Bischoff
2000-12-27  6:36             ` Jorge Godoy
2000-12-27  6:36             ` Jochem Huhmann
2000-12-27  6:36           ` Evolution of the DocBook tools Eric Bischoff
2000-12-27  6:36           ` Eric Bischoff
2000-12-27  6:36             ` Jorge Godoy
2000-12-27  6:36     ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? Jorge Godoy
2000-12-27  6:36       ` Eric Bischoff
2000-12-27  6:36 ` David Mason
2000-12-27  6:36   ` Norman Walsh [this message]
2000-12-27  6:36 ` David Mason
2000-12-27  6:36   ` Norman Walsh
2000-12-27  6:36   ` Eric Bischoff
2000-12-27  6:36     ` Mark Galassi
2000-12-27  6:36 ` was something else - now SGML and XML David Mason
2000-12-27  6:36 ` David Mason
2000-12-27  6:36   ` Norman Walsh
2000-12-27  6:36 ` Re : db2??????? vs. SGMLTools2 vs. what else? David Mason
2000-12-27  6:36   ` Eric Bischoff

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=7453-Wed23Feb2000110215-0500-ndw@nwalsh.com \
    --to=ndw@nwalsh.com \
    --cc=dcm@redhat.com \
    --cc=docbook-tools-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).