[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Every proposal I receive requires integration to a
document imaging system. One can argue that that is
not a complex document production system but only
if one hasn't built one. Images are stored, but so
is the metadata, the OCR'd text, the full-text retrieval
indexes and so on. OTOH, I don't need full-up
SGML to do this initially but as the requirements
creep starts, it is good to have that option.
Things like minimization and the ability to tweak
in the Declaration file pick up value over time.
What XML 1.0 is minus the DTD is a more verbose
and structured comma-delimited ASCII. That is
what WFie "data-centric" in practical terms means and
is one reason some still question the utility of
XML in many of its targeted applications once they
get past XML hype and into the reality of the code.
To talk about XML as more than that, one gets into
the application languages and systems built for XML.
Internet applications have driven these to a broader
consensus than the SGML applications achieved. The
XML industry has done a good job there.
len
From: Paul Prescod [mailto:paul@prescod.net]
I don't know that users (even sophisticated ones!) want complex document
systems.
|
