From owner-freebsd-doc Fri Dec 21 11:59:59 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from lists.blarg.net (lists.blarg.net [206.124.128.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BAD037B416 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 11:59:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from thig.blarg.net (thig.blarg.net [206.124.128.18]) by lists.blarg.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05AA1BD3C; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 11:59:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([206.124.139.115]) by thig.blarg.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA12740; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 11:59:50 -0800 Received: (from jojo@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.3) id fBLK0Fm67184; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 12:00:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from swear@blarg.net) To: Andrew McKay Cc: FreeBSD-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: should i be using sgml or xml? References: From: swear@blarg.net (Gary W. Swearingen) Date: 21 Dec 2001 12:00:15 -0800 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Lines: 19 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Cuyahoga Valley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Andrew McKay writes: > My thoughts, for what they are worth, are that I can see a small advantage > in having XML as a potential doc output format, although I have yet to > work out what advantage XML has over HTML for this kind of work. Please excuse me if this is slightly off-topic (I'm not sure if I understand the topic exactly), but a few months ago I used "tidy" to convert my small web site to XHTML on the understanding (IIRC) that it was XML that all recent browsers would render reasonably well (for simple stuff like I have anyway).