William F. Hammond writes:
> to understand that HTML is just NOT a good authoring language and was
> never intended to be an authoring language. It is browser fodder
> designed for easy and efficient browser handling. XML, eXtensible
oh come. of course it was intended as an authoring language! it is NOT
good for efficient browser writing!!
> Markup Language, is an extension of HTML to allow anybody to create
> a tag set. But XML is also NOT an authoring language.
XML is _not_ an extension of HTML!!! grr. and its a good authoring
> It is more or less correct to view every XML language as also an
> SGML language. Therefore, many SGML languages are also not good
> for authors. However, some are not too bad.
"more or less"? XML is a _strict_ subset of SGML!
> transformations as pre-processing for LaTeX. Some industrial strength
> publishers *may* want to think in terms of multiple SGML transformations
> as pre-processing to TeX directly.
thanks for the permission :-}
> I am wary of messing with Knuth's TeX.
i dont see the connection...