ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Richtext and SGML

1992-02-06 12:30:47
On Wed, 5 Feb 92 19:53 GMT you said:
 I find the arguments about existing tools, compatibility with a
widely-used and increasingly supported International Standard, a
careful
review of generic vs formatting tags (an issue I've tried to raise
before) in the context of not assuming a particular display model,
etc.,
to be very persuasive.

John et al:

We have no major SGML user community here.  However, everybody I've
shown RichText to has gone into "wow mode" and thinks it's pretty neat.
Can somebody please itemize the problems in RichText as currently
defined which cause problems with these "existing tools and compatability"?

What is in RichText that can't wait for a revision document, and that will
horribly break all existing RichText viewers because it's not at all
backward combatable?

Unless somebody can produce a *real* show-stopper, I am tempted to say
that our site is *at present* satisfied with RichText *as is*, and that
the problems should be addressed in a year or two in a "Return of RichText"
document.  Yes, RichText isn't fully SGML-compatable, and yes, there's
still warts on it.  However, from what I've seen, it gets the job done.

Let's reach closure and get this sucker out the door - I think we *need*
to get this out in the field so we can get a clear idea of what the
*real* problems are.  I'll bet a large pizza(*) that a year from now, we will
be looking at it and realizing that the *real* warts in RichText are
something totally different than what we're arguing now.

                                  Valdis Kletnieks
                                  Computer Systems Engineer
                                  Virginia Polytechnic Institute

P.S. the previously mentioned pizza will be collectible when there exists
a "Content-Type: Application/Pizza-Delivery" ;)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>