🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3745:Oct805:47:1890@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:

   Shouldn't it be possible to implement SGML in TeX? Among other things,
   this would give SGML 

I am not sure what you mean; in the simplest case, are you saying
`write an SGML DTD which describes LaTeX'? if so, it could be done,
I think, if you adopt the widest possible interpretation of the
syntax. Or do you mean write a (La)TeX macro package that looked like
a common SGML DTD? Remember that SGML isn't a piece of software, so
you can't implement it! the the trouble with TeX is the ease with which
the user can define new commands...

   an opportunity for wide use---which it doesn't
   really deserve, but that's a side issue.
Is SGML *designed* for widespread use? so far as I am concerned, its a
system for  describing documents for interchange with other people.
Therefore I will carry on writing in TeX for my own purposes and if I
ever want to offer the document to the world, I'll make it conform to
SGML-itis and find a DTD. Since I (and all other LaTeX and troff -mm
and scribe users) have been writing generic markup for years, there
should be no problem :-} ... except describing the syntax of LaTeX
unequivocally. 


--
Sebastian Rahtz                        S.Rahtz@uk.ac.soton.ecs (JANET)
Computer Science                       S.Rahtz@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Bitnet)
Southampton S09 5NH, UK                S.Rahtz@sot-ecs.uucp    (uucp)