xml-dev - Re: RELAX to ISO

[Marcus Carr <mrc@allette.com.au>]

Dylan Walsh wrote:

> Maybe it is a mistaken impression. However I've never seen any big XML vs.
> SGML debates, or any disgruntled SGML'ers flaming XML.

You joined the list too late ;-)  Actually, aside from a few issues like
white-space handling, there weren't too many big fights, unless my memory is ...
uh, sorry, what was I saying?

> Are we newbies
> missing out on some of the merits of SGML? Would there ever be a case where
> someone starting a brand new project today, with no need for any legacy
> support, would choose to use SGML over XML, because of some of the culled
> functionality is useful/needed?

You might even use both SGML and XML in the same project. Marking up anything
like legislation or other complex but variable documents tends to be much easier
in SGML. You can omit start or end tags or map them to a simplified syntax, ie:

  [Kenneth .G. Cartman]

is recognised by the processor as being exactly identical to:

  <name>
   <first>Kenneth</first>
   <midinitial>G</midinitial>
   <last>Cartman</last>
  </name>

It's trivial to instruct the a processor such as OmniMark to output the expanded
version and presto - XML for further processing or integration with other
processes. SGML and XML both have roles, though as there is is unquestionably
overlap between the two, XML is rightly taking up the position of "lead ML".


--
Regards,

Marcus Carr                      email:  mrc@allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
Allette Systems (Australia)      www:    http://www.allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
       - Einstein