🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <P!+^?5^@rpi.edu> dms@aix03.aix.rpi.edu (david m schwartz) writes:
>Hello -- I became aware of SGML this fall.  The folks who market SGML had an
>exhibition booth at EP '90 (Electronic Publishing Conference held this year at
> ...
SGML is not a proprietary product.  It is an ISO standard.
>
>1.  SGML has been described as a context-free markup.  In a recent posting I
>think I read someone refering to TeX as a context-specific markup.  Could
>someone enlarge on this thread for me?
That would be a big task.  Continue.
>
>2.  Latex (I believe I also read in a recent article) is a more suitable
>SGML environment than is TeX.  Is this because Latex is a macro-based 
>markup while Tex is more a control-word type markup.  In other words, a markup
>that describes what the text looks like vs. what document element the text is
>being assigned to?  Would this analagy hold also, for say, SCRIPT vs. GML?
>GML is a fore-runner of Bookmaster.  An intermediate step was ISIL (which never
>did make it past internal use at IBM) but there are some very significant
>bloodlines here and if someone can frame their answers to my questions around
>these IBM products, it will greatly add to my understanding.  In fact, I
>read someone's comment that Bookmaster is a suitable SGML environment.  

I can oblige you here.  Script is similar conceptually to troff, TeX, 
Scribe, and the like.  GML is a structured language that is interpreted 
and converted to script, which in turn is converted to device driver 
instructuctions for printing.  ISIL is just an extended set of GML 
(Doesn't ISIL mean IBM Structured Information Language?) and Bookmaster is 
a more commercialized packaging of ISIL.  Bookmaster is complemented by a 
package called BookManager, which is intended to provided formatting and 
presentation of online documentation.  GML was written by Charles Goldfarb.
ISIL and BookMaster were extensions for IBM's not always apparent motivations
(but you can be sure that money is a factor).  Unfortunately, ISIL and Book-
Master/Manager took directions that led them astray from the "purity" of GML
and away from the direction pointed to by SGML.  (SGML was also a Charles 
Goldfarb conception.)  However, IBM (or elements within IBM) have come to 
recognize that SGML is A Good Thing.  Therefore, IBM's latest version of 
BookMaster/Manager can parse SGML as well as its ISIL-flavored code.  That 
is, if I understand correctly, BookMaster 3.0 can parse SGML.

My disclaimer:  I have contracted to IBM in the past and used these products, 
but I am not privy to their plans or reasoning.  I have communicated with 
Charles Goldfarb, but only seeking information about SGML and not about his 
work for and with IBM.
>
>4.  Is it likely that we will see SGML front-ends on future word-processors? 
But of course.  Sort of.  Word Processor and Typesetting packages will 
happily convert SGML into their proprietary formats.  A few farsighted 
companies will provide the reverse conversion (a more difficult task).  A 
few clever companies will use SGML as their native format.
>
>5.  As I currently understand it, SGML is a two-step process:
>
>	a) define a structure for the document
>	b) write the document
>	c) run the document through the SGML software (?) and see if the 
>	  document adheres to the structure.
>
>three, three steps, as I understand it, SGML is a three step process
>no one expects the Spanish Inquisition, shades of Monty Python :)

Actually, most users will not mess with structure definitions.  They will
use predeveloped Document Type Descriptions.  Formatting gurus will do 
the document definition stuff.  The point is, the average writer shouldn't 
have to (be allowed to) mess with the document format.

>6.  I assume it is OK for SGML documents to be broken into chapter files?

Yeah.

>...  I hope that these questions make some sense.
They do, but they suggest that you might want to "read up" on SGML.
>
>FYI, my interest in all this comes from the fact that I perform technical
>writing services for a company that develops a text-retrieval program.  The
>growing popularity of SGML is making the developers scurry to permit not only
>the input of an SGML document, but the retrieval of said document by 
>permitting the user to specify search parameters that are unique to the 
>hierarchical structure of an SGML document.

Yessss, any company doing text-retrieval must be very interested in SGML.
I don't know that I think of an SGML document as necessarily being 
hierarchical...  

I would suggest further readings.  Unfortunately, the publishing software 
companies have been very slow in moving towards SGML, in spite of early 
endorsement by the American Association of Publishers.  The real impetus is 
the U.S. Government's CALS initiative, and the potential for amazing online
documentation capabilities (including text retrieval).  

I have "SGML: An Author's Guide" by Martin Bryan (Addison Wesley).  It is 
an OK starting place, abeit of narrow focus.  I am waiting for "The SGML
Handbook" by Charles Goldfarb, which I already expected to be out by now...
maybe I'd better start hounding my favorite bookstore...  The SGML Handbook 
should incorporate the ISO 8879 specification, so you can safely skip 
getting that document.  If you are involved with IBM products, you can 
examine "Solutions for CALS Technical Publishing" (IBM document GC34-5153).

I cannot help further, because I am still in early stages of research 
myself.  (Need to spend a few days in a good library, going through the 
periodical literature and stuff).
 
Sorry for chopping up your posting and ignoring part of it, but time 
flies...
 
-lar

-- 
---------                             TIVOLI Systems, Inc.
Lar Kaufman      512-454-3301         (voice) 512-329-2455
4503 Sinclair Avenue                  (fax)   512-329-2755
Austin, Texas 78756  USA              (e)  lark@tivoli.com