[6660] in www-talk@info.cern.ch
Re: Frames & WWW
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Simon E Spero)
Wed Nov 16 16:23:34 1994
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 21:39:03 +0100
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: ses@tipper.oit.unc.edu
From: Simon E Spero <ses@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
>>>>> "gtn" == Gavin Nicol <gtn@ebt.com> writes:
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
