[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> *Bonehead elements* might be good. Other than in
> the SGML Handbook, I've never seen these used
> in practice.
You haven't spent enough time around ugly (read "cost effective by
coding alone") markup jobs then. I've used omissable start and end tags
more times than I could count - the classic situation is for turning
something like:
<section>Laundry basket
<para>The laundry basket has a long and fascinating history...
into something like:
<section>
<title>Laundry basket</title>
<para>The laundry basket has a long and fascinating history...
It's intuitive, equivalent and less markup. I'm surprised that there's
so little enthusiasm for this - I've had markup teams ask for this sort
of change to be added to a DTD. Omission is one of the key drivers that
has kept us using SGML en route to the delivery of XML data. Normalizers
are cheap, markup people aren't.
--
Regards,
Marcus Carr email: mcarr@allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
Allette Systems (Australia) www: http://www.allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
- Einstein
|
