Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: "Julian Reschke" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: "David Megginson" <email@example.com>,<firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sat, 20 Nov 1999 18:32:18 +0100
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of
> David Megginson
> Sent: Saturday, November 20, 1999 2:14 PM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: SGML, XML and SML
> Sean McGrath <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Any SML doc is an XML doc but not the other way around.
> > SML < XML < SGML
> That gets you into the subset dilemma: all conformant XML processors
> will be able to handle SML, but not all conformant SML processors will
> be able to handle XML.
Why would that be a dilemma? That was exactly the goal, correct?
I really think it would be A Good Thing to have a common name for XML minus
a list of features...
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)