discuss: is SGML rendering still buggy?
Subject:
Re: is SGML rendering still buggy?
From:
Poet/Joshua Drake ####@####.####
Date:
31 May 2001 23:12:46 -0000
Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0105311520480.17769-100000@commandprompt.com>
>were still a bit buggy, and were not always producing the desired
>output. Does anyone know if this is still the case, or are there
>good utilities right now to produce the various output formats?
We at OpenDocs use DocBook for everything. It works perfectly for us.
>
>Besides, are there any other good arguments to go with SGML instead
>of latex, besides the range of output formats that can be produced
>from sgml? (i don't want to start a war on this one, but we honestly
>don't know which way to go, and doing an educated guess is still
>better than flipping a coin...)
This might start a war on its own, but Latex is dying. SGML/XML is
steadily bringing up the rear as more tools become available. SGML is also
readable in source form which is more than I can say for Latex ;)
J
>
>Thanks in advance for any information or hints,
>
>Roel van Meer
>--
>1A First Alternative ####@####.#### www.alt001.com
>Linvision BV ####@####.#### (www|devel).linvision.com
>--
>
>_________________________
>http://list.linuxdoc.org/
>
--
--
<COMPANY>CommandPrompt - http://www.commandprompt.com </COMPANY>
<PROJECT>OpenDocs, LLC. - http://www.opendocs.org </PROJECT>
<PROJECT>LinuxPorts - http://www.linuxports.com </PROJECT>
<WEBMASTER>LDP - http://www.linuxdoc.org </WEBMASTER>
--
Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.
--
