Lists Home |
Date Index |
And that is not a good view unless one is constraining a priori.
You may not have been around for the early rounds of the debates
between WYSIWYG and SGML systems. It was claimed that WYSIWYG
was better because it enabled free text entry. The conflict was
that the market that could afford the then expensive WYSIWYG
systems needed constrained documents. Internally, a WYSIWYG
looks a lot like HTML (or RTF). This gave some of the SGML
editors their first boost. The ones that did well also had
a way to relax the markup constraint. One turned it on as
one needed it. Because information arrived out of order
relative to the document structure, one had to relax that
constraint. Validation doesn't have to be on all the time.
If XML editors are forcing it to be on all the time, another
history lesson was missed. That one is mystifying because
anyone with experience knows it. This is the data-centric,
database-first viewpoint fumbling the ball. Database systems
want schemas a priori.
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
A content-first view doesn't seem
very popular in the XML world at present, and I can't say I see that
changing. Markup now seems to come first.