X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1416" "Mon" "30" "November" "1998" "15:00:57" "+0000" "Sebastian Rahtz" "s.rahtz@ELSEVIER.CO.UK" nil "31" "Re: portable LaTeX" "^Date:" nil nil "11" nil nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: from listserv.gmd.de (listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.1]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA04625; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 16:44:57 +0100 (MET) Received: from lsv1.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.2) by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <9.1F76A732@listserv.gmd.de>; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 16:44:12 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 411760 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 16:07:53 +0100 Received: from pillar.elsevier.co.uk (root@pillar.elsevier.co.uk [193.131.222.35]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA26207 for ; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 16:07:46 +0100 (MET) Received: from snowdon.elsevier.co.uk [193.131.197.164]; by pillar.elsevier.co.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP; for ""; sender "s.rahtz@elsevier.co.uk"; id OAA14032; hop 0; Mon, 30 Nov 1998 14:59:20 GMT Received: from srahtz (actually host srahtz.elsevier.co.uk) by snowdon.elsevier.co.uk with SMTP (PP); Mon, 30 Nov 1998 15:06:37 +0000 X-Mailer: emacs 20.3.2 (via feedmail 9-beta-3 Q); VM 6.61 under Emacs 20.3.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <199811301413.JAA17823@hilbert.math.albany.edu> Message-ID: <13922.45865.691998.450110@srahtz> Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: <199811301413.JAA17823@hilbert.math.albany.edu> Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 15:00:57 +0000 From: Sebastian Rahtz Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: portable LaTeX Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 2991 William F. Hammond writes: > One can speculate about why SGML has been such a well kept secret. It > takes some work to appreciate it. That does not means that it does > not work nor that there are not reliable free tools nor that it would > not be fairly easy once we come to understand what it can do for us to > generate tools that are optimized for our purposes. you would have enjoyed a keynote at MT 98 by Brian "Scribe" Reid, where he basically repeated a talk he gave in 1981. it was an effective demonstration that being "right" and "working" markup stuff has zero impact on most people, who simply dont *want* generic markup... > Note: HTML 2.0, HTML 3.2, and HTML 4 all use different SGML declarations, > none the default. > and no HTML browser enforces validation, does it? > For this purpose one should perhaps view an SGML document type as a > decl/dtd pair. Of course, there is no decl for an XML. oh come. there is very much a decl for XML!!! its vital for parsing XML with SGML tools! > Obviously, to the extent that it is sensible to adopt different formats > for different purposes, it is desirable to have automatic processing to > faciliate conversions. Many such conversions should be fairly easy. ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^ by which we see why LaTeX is unpopular in production workflows. that translates to "10% failure" sebastian