• To: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>
• Subject: Re: Remembering the original XML vision
• From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>
• Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 09:19:32 -0800
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <06cb01c2d5b0$d0073990$4bc8a8c0@A...>
• References: <7c.35a8563b.2b7ff77d@a...> <06cb01c2d5b0$d0073990$4bc8a8c0@A...>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130

Rick Jelliffe wrote:

> SGML - 85 pages (in my printed copy) without the annexes
> 
> XML - 52 pages (printed out from a web browser, at a medium to small setting) 
> Add a couple of pages for XML 1.1 without the appendixes.  

Fair enough, but if you remove all the unicode-character apparatus from 
XML 1.0 you probably cut that in half.  Which is one of the only 
important *technical* differences between XML and SGML - SGML was really 
underspecified on what a "character" was.  At the end of the day XML's 
main technical contribution may turn out to have been that it dragged 
Unicode into the mainstream. -Tim

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Remembering the original XML vision
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>
  • Unicode and XML (was Re: Remembering the original XML vision)
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• References:
  • Re: Remembering the original XML vision
    • From: AndrewWatt2000@a...
  • Re: Remembering the original XML vision
    • From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Remembering the original XML vision
• Next by Date: Unicode and XML (was Re: Remembering the original XML vision)
• Previous by thread: Re: Remembering the original XML vision
• Next by thread: Unicode and XML (was Re: Remembering the original XML vision)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread