[rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others"
brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter) Sun, 17 June 2012 09:21 UTC
From: "brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com"
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 10:21:06 +0100
Subject: [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others"
In-Reply-To: <4FDDA07A.8030604@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
References: <20120615221607.15433.65260.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <0284EF26-18AA-491A-85F9-6997AF7279F2@vpnc.org> <6D102866-54EB-4C1D-806F-C5C04A39A6AB@muada.com> <4FDD9EF0.7070103@gmail.com> <4FDDA07A.8030604@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <4FDDA182.70907@gmail.com>
On 2012-06-17 10:16, Martin J. D?rst wrote: > On 2012/06/17 18:10, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > >> Down level again, draft-hoffman-rfcformat-canon-others-02 seems >> to assume that XML is a stable format, unlike HTML. I'm not so sure >> about that; we might have to regress another level and say that >> our format is defined in SGML (even if, in practice, it is based >> on a specific version of some dialect of SGML such as a current >> version of XML or HTML). > > Oh, no, please. SGML has lots of nobs to turn and tweak that proved to > be virtually useless (you can choose other characters in place of '<' > and '>', and so on) or outright counterproductive. And while it's not > dead, XML is way more straightforward, with many more (and way cheaper) > tools. I know. I'm talking about an abstraction; I don't suggest that we should actually write our own SGML, but simply cite SGML as the root of the syntax realised by whatever *ML we actually use. Brian
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Paul Hoffman
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" John Levine
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Peter Saint-Andre
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Joe Touch
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Paul Hoffman
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Iljitsch van Beijnum
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Joe Touch
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Paul Hoffman
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Paul Hoffman
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Joe Touch
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Iljitsch van Beijnum
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" John Levine
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Joe Touch
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Yoav Nir
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Brian E Carpenter
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" "Martin J. Dürst"
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Brian E Carpenter
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Joel M. Halpern
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" John Levine
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Paul Hoffman
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Brian E Carpenter
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Paul Hoffman
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" John Levine
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Brian E Carpenter
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Leonard Rosenthol
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Phillip Hallam-Baker
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Joe Touch
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Heather Flanagan RFC Series Editor
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Paul Hoffman
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Heather Flanagan RFC Series Editor
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Paul Hoffman
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" John Levine
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Phillip Hallam-Baker
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" John R Levine
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Iljitsch van Beijnum
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Brian E Carpenter
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" Dave Crocker
- [rfc-i] New proposal for "canonical and others" "Martin J. Dürst"