gtn> To: hallam@dxal18.cern.ch CC: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
>> SGML is alledgedly quite capable of doing everything. The
>> problem is that the designers did not try an implementation of
>> many features before they piled them into the spec. Test
gtn> Bollocks. Most people avoid the grottier features of SGML and
gtn> everyone recognises that this is the correct thing to do. I
("Bollocks"? Are you English, or did you translate into the native idiom?:)
Phil's comment about SGML being spec'd without implementation isn't strictly
true. In fact, the situation is pretty much the reverse... SGML grew out
of IBM's GML- A lot of the peculiarities are the result of implementation
features of GML that slid their way in to the standard. All sorts of whacky
restrictions in the standard make a strange sort of sense if you think about
them in the context of one particular implementation of a parser.
Simon