OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


I've been following the discussion and, being an advocate of both XML and 
SGML, I thought I should throw in my two cents worth.

As I understand it, there are two distinct activities that occur on the web 
which I see being lumped together in these discussions.  The first activity 
is browsing and the second activity is the exchange of data between 
applications over the web/Internet/intranet.

SGML is designed for documention.  A browser is a tool to render marked-up 
documentation into a form formatted for human readability.  In this usage 
SGML is superior to XML, and it makes sense that we should have SGML browsers 
because this gives enterprises a way to... well ... browse ... their 
repositories of SGML documentation.  Which in many domains is considerable -- 
millions of pages in aerospace, and I'm sure the Aussie Hansard is 
considerably more.  So, why on earth would we want to abandon SGML browsers 
for XML browsers?  

XML is designed for data transer, or at least that is my understanding, and 
most XML documents are not going to be viewed by people but be generated by 
one application, squirted over to another applicaiton which parses it and 
throws away the XML. once it has wrung the data out of the document.  
(Simplfying the process perhaps)
Remember the SGML was not developed as a internet data exchange tool -- at 
the time there was also a Berlin Wall, Watergate was still a hot topic and 
Disco ruled.  SGML is industrial strength and more than we need for this data 
transfer, especially when we have to write those applications.  XML was 
designed as a data exchange tool, not as a competitor to SGML.

Two good tools that work well when you use them for their intended purpose.