TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Good question. How about here: http://www.w3.org/XML. Anyone else have any
thoughts?
I agree, XML is a moving target, as is HTML (now at, what, version 4 plus
all the browser differences) and JavaScript (what, at 1.2)? Indeed, I find
that, like the scripting languages, programming languages are moving
targets, too, although certainly more mature than newbies like XML and HTML,
PowerBuilder and Visual Basic, for example, are changing, maturing, and
adding features . . ..
Exporting SGML to XML sounds like an excellent way to go. There are some
differences, XML won't let you take some of the shortcuts (be as sloppy)
that SGML will. OTOH, XML does not seem to be as broad in scope as SGML, but
seems to be getting a wider audience and support.
Anyone else with thoughts on this?
Best regards,
Sean
sean -at- quodata -dot- com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fragnito, Vic [SMTP:vic -dot- fragnito -at- honeywell -dot- com]
>
> Lets get this straight. Where is the XML standard? Last I heard there
> was
> none. Try too hit a moving target. They should just call it XHTML
> because,
> I believe that it was developed, solely because HTML's shortcomings were4
> too much to overlook any more.
> If you want a DTD, a style sheet, etc for XML, you already have it in
> SGML.
> What is the difference?
>
> I believe, the best way to get XML if required for web is to down
> translate
> from SGML:.
