[DOC-SIG] What I don't like about SGML

[Fred L. Drake]

Guido van Rossum writes:
 > Hm, I'm not sure if we're talking about the same GML then.  According
 > to Goldfarb's home page (http://www.sgmlsource.com/):

  This is the same one.  The machinery for defining processing
separately from the abstract markup was there, but you pretty much had 
to be an IBM insider to get enough information about how to use it.
That's why the Script/VS control words got used as much as they did.
I agree; the original format of the markup would have been better left 
on the punched cards.  But it was sufficient for me to write about 150 
pages of a software manual (user info. and configuration).  I had more 
problems dealing with XEdit than the markup itself, but too much of
the markup ended up being process-oriented than it should have been.
Very tedious stuff, indeed.
  A lot like LaTeX in many ways, but it's much easier to extend the
LaTeX markup than the GML markup.


  -Fred

--
Fred L. Drake, Jr.
fdrake@cnri.reston.va.us
Corporation for National Research Initiatives
1895 Preston White Drive
Reston, VA    20191-5434

_______________
DOC-SIG  - SIG for the Python Documentation Project

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