Received: from mail.proteosys.com ([213.139.130.197]) by nummer-3.proteosys with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Fri, 18 Jul 2003 23:03:57 +0200 Received: by mail.proteosys.com (8.12.9/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h6IL3tSb005686 for ; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 23:03:56 +0200 Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.27]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h6IKwdGl019502; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 22:58:39 +0200 (MET DST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C34D70.1A559C80" Received: from listserv (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.27]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.3/8.12.3/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id h6HM0DkP008378; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 22:57:54 +0200 Received: from LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 1657 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 22:57:50 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.3/8.12.3/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id h6IKvoM9022823 for ; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 22:57:50 +0200 Received: from bilbo.dynip.com (pcp743704pcs.reston01.va.comcast.net [68.49.150.94]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h6IKwJmp013110 for ; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 22:58:20 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from bilbo.localnet (boris@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bilbo.dynip.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-7woody) with ESMTP id h6IKwHdS028469 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=FAIL); Fri, 18 Jul 2003 16:58:17 -0400 Received: (from boris@localhost) by bilbo.localnet (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-7woody) id h6IKwHwi028465; Fri, 18 Jul 2003 16:58:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: <16151.19056.880153.478641@pussy.npc.de> (message from Joachim Schrod on Fri, 18 Jul 2003 03:16:32 +0200) References: <20030710081528.A12401@diabolo.informatik.rwth-aachen.de> <78ADDA01-B2DC-11D7-8AE7-0050E4455404@atlis.com> <20030711081704.A14039@diabolo.informatik.rwth-aachen.de> <16146.60345.852158.31606@pussy.npc.de> <16150.44860.510973.820690@pussy.npc.de> <200307171432.h6HEWXrZ002742@bilbo.localnet> <16151.19056.880153.478641@pussy.npc.de> Return-Path: X-Mailer: GNU Emacs 20.7.2 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jul 2003 21:03:58.0510 (UTC) FILETIME=[1B3C04E0:01C34D70] X-Authentication-Warning: bilbo.localnet: boris set sender to borisv@lk.net using -f X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.28 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang) X-Spam-Score: -10.9 () IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES,X_AUTH_WARNING Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: XML vs. (La)TeX markup (was: XML, UTF-8 and TeX engines) Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 21:58:17 +0100 Message-ID: A<200307182058.h6IKwHwi028465@bilbo.localnet> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Re: XML vs. (La)TeX markup (was: XML, UTF-8 and TeX engines) Thread-Index: AcNNcBtTmN8POj0jQ1+4WWNJIcH+cQ== From: "Boris Veytsman" To: Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 4715 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C34D70.1A559C80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable JS> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 03:16:32 +0200 JS> From: Joachim Schrod JS> -- Actually, IMO the main disadvantage of TeX markup is the JS> shortage of skillfull people in the job market to implement that JS> markup. That makes any manager worth his salary shy away from JS> TeX. For me, that's the main reason to use XML, I find more JS> people with the needed skills. This brings the question, which I hope is NOT off topic here. Why is the situatoion on the job market so skewed? I personally find TeX markup much more "natural" and easy than XML -- why do most people think otherwise? Is there a "silver bullet" in XML markup that helps thousands people understand it? -- Good luck -Boris ------_=_NextPart_001_01C34D70.1A559C80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: XML vs. (La)TeX markup (was: XML, UTF-8 and TeX = engines)

JS> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 03:16:32 +0200
JS> From: Joachim Schrod = <jschrod@ACM.ORG>


JS>  -- Actually, IMO the main disadvantage of = TeX markup is the
JS>  shortage of skillfull people in the job = market to implement that
JS>  markup.  That makes any manager = worth his salary shy away from
JS>  TeX. For me, that's the main reason to = use XML, I find more
JS>  people with the needed skills.


This brings the question, which I hope is NOT off = topic here. Why is
the situatoion on the job market so skewed? I = personally find TeX
markup much more "natural" and easy than = XML -- why do most people
think otherwise? Is there a "silver bullet" = in XML markup that helps
thousands people understand it?

--
Good luck

-Boris

------_=_NextPart_001_01C34D70.1A559C80--