[DOC-SIG] Re: [PSA MEMBERS] [XML] Notes on the Tutorial's markup

[Paul Prescod]

> Just use TIM
> (ftp://ftp.parc.xerox.com/pub/ilu/2.0a11/manual-html/manual_21.html),
> which is a Texinfo-based system that produces either text, Postscript,
> or HTML.  It can be easily munged to produce XML instead of, or in
> addition to, HTML, if desired.  In distinction to Texinfo, TIM supports
> pictures and URLs just fine, and supports application-specific generic
> markup (you can say @French{mais oui!} instead of @i{mais oui!}), it's
> easier to type than XML (@emph{indeed!} instead <EMPH>indeed</EMPH>),
> it's free, and the tool chain already works.

SGML has all of the benefits that you describe 
 * Generic Markup
 * <emph/shortforms/
 * high quality free software (is there a TIM editor? how do I get TIM data into FrameMaker?)
 * SGML is not just trivially extensible in the TeX sense, but it
 has a language for enforcing the structure of your extensions for
 (e.g.) complex descriptions of library components or whatever else.

But more subtly, it is good to use SGML over TeX variants for the same reason
that it is good to use ILU over language-specific extension mechanisms 
(where possible). Because it does the job and it is based on industry (or in
SGML's case, international) standards and we can save time and money by
sticking to standards rather than using proprietary technologies. We've got
to stop reinventing wheels, rewriting parsers etc.

I am personally reluctant to get involved with Yet Another TeX variant. I
grieve the megabytes of documents stuck in these formats. If the TIM 
concepts and/or code are good, we can incorporate them into an SGML based 
system just as TeX and HTML are routinely incorporated. 

 Paul Prescod


_______________
DOC-SIG  - SIG for the Python Documentation Project

send messages to: doc-sig@python.org
administrivia to: doc-sig-request@python.org
_______________