[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]



Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

> *Bonehead elements* might be good.  Other than in 
> the SGML Handbook, I've never seen these used 
> in practice.

You haven't spent enough time around ugly (read "cost effective by 
coding alone") markup jobs then. I've used omissable start and end tags 
more times than I could count - the classic situation is for turning 
something like:

   <section>Laundry basket
   <para>The laundry basket has a long and fascinating history...

into something like:

   <section>
   <title>Laundry basket</title>
   <para>The laundry basket has a long and fascinating history...

It's intuitive, equivalent and less markup. I'm surprised that there's 
so little enthusiasm for this - I've had markup teams ask for this sort 
of change to be added to a DTD. Omission is one of the key drivers that 
has kept us using SGML en route to the delivery of XML data. Normalizers 
are cheap, markup people aren't.


-- 
Regards,

Marcus Carr                      email:  mcarr@a...
___________________________________________________________________
Allette Systems (Australia)      www:    http://www.allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
        - Einstein


Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member