RE: [xml-dev] XUL Compact Syntax Study Now Online - Is XML too hard for Aunt Trudie?

["Hunsberger, Peter" <Peter.Hunsberger@STJUDE.ORG>]

Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@ingr.com> writes:
> 
> So resurrect the SGML Declaration and enable everyone 
> to declare compact syntaxes for the application profiles 
> in the standard way.  Why not have the compact syntaxes 
> interoperate as well?

+10 ;-)

I still find myself reverting to defining new Word styles in the old GML
style I first learned before SGML came about.

> If we are to brandish big pointy sticks, maybe they 
> should be standard pointy sticks.  Or are all of the 
> arguments that led to the development of the SGML 
> subset suddenly moot in a trendy way?
 
Not sure the SGML declaration is a big pointy stick?  More like a
amorphous smothering blob that's really hard to get a handle on?