Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Switching to XML

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org, David Blewett <david(at)dawninglight(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Switching to XML
Date: 2006-12-10 16:10:23
Message-ID: 1165767023.13210.25.camel@localhost.localdomain (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-docs
On Sun, 2006-12-10 at 10:08 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> David Fetter wrote:
> > Peter, if you have a working example of a GUI tool that can be used
> > with the SGML source in its current form, the burden of proof is on
> > you to demonstrate it.  Another flat assertion from you of some kind
> > of mathematical equivalence between SGML and XML will *not* do the
> > trick.
> Well, most of you are obviously led into twisting every single thread on 
> this mailing list related to some sort of tool trouble into a thread 
> that SGML is completely unusable for unrelated reasons such as that 
> there are no editing tools or that it takes too long to build.  I have 
> no interest in these sorts of uninformed discussions.

Bah! That is certainly not what is happening here. No one has said that
they are completely unusable. Even I have said they are usable but that
they can be daunting.

The point of this discussion comes down to some very simple things.

1. Tools. SGML tools are not as actively developed as the XML ones. No
you can not use XML tools with SGML as effectively.

If I am wrong on #1 Peter, fine. Prove it.  You keep telling us we are
wrong but are unwilling to share where or how. 

2. We have two regional projects that take a lot of hard earned time to
work around the lackluster state of our source documentation, namely
SGML. This hard earned time would better be spent on other things and
could be if you would stop stonewalling and let us move to XML.

3. You are the only one that is aruging *for* staying SGML. 

> The question here was by David Blewett about creating multiple indexes.  
> Has anyone bothered to look into that?  My experimentation, by the way, 
> shows that it works exactly as described in the cited document.

Which cited document? However this still doesn't solve #2

Lastly, even if I am completely cranked on #1 and #3, #2 is reason
enough to move to XML regardless of your opinion.

We need to move to XML for the regional projects.


Joshua D. Drake


      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project:

In response to


pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2006-12-10 16:37:09
Subject: Re: Switching to XML
Previous:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2006-12-10 16:03:54
Subject: Re: Switching to XML

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group