Subject: RE: Formatting Objects considered harmful From: "John E. Simpson" <simpson@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 13:11:42 -0400 |
At 12:05 PM 4/17/99 -0400, Didier PH Martin wrote: >I think that this danger [someone's wanting to build >documents in an FO-only way] can happen only if a major manufacturer with a >sufficient market share publish a product which produces FOs. If we look at >these manufacturers: >a) Microsoft - they choused an other path ( a mix of semantic XML, non >semantic XML and HTML+CSS) >b) Corel - They choused a XML/SGML/HTML path. > >I think the probability that this happens is quite low. Yes. Also -- again, as I read it -- the essay which triggered this thread argues not about the danger of "a product which produces FOs," but about the danger of a product which produces *only* FOs, shorn of the semantics built into normal XML document instances. Hard for me to imagine an MS or Corel interested in doing so, at this stage of the game. ========================================================== John E. Simpson | The secret of eternal youth simpson@xxxxxxxxxxx | is arrested development. http://www.flixml.org | -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: Formatting Objects considered h, Didier PH Martin | Thread | Re: Formatting Objects considered h, Scott S. Lawton |
RE: Formatting Objects considered h, Didier PH Martin | Date | Re: Formatting Objects considered h, Scott S. Lawton |
Month |