From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed May 14 18:20:43 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA19821
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 14 May 1997 18:20:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [204.188.121.18])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA19816
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 14 May 1997 18:20:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.star-gate.com [127.0.0.1])
	by rah.star-gate.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA23131;
	Wed, 14 May 1997 18:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199705150120.SAA23131@rah.star-gate.com>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96
To: John Fieber <jfieber@indiana.edu>
cc: "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pgiffuni@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co>,
        Jean-Marc Zucconi <jmz@cabri.obs-besancon.fr>, jkh@time.cdrom.com,
        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Is Thot (WYSIWIG editor) for you? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 14 May 1997 20:07:18 CDT."
             <Pine.BSF.3.96.970514195519.311z-100000@fallout.campusview.indiana.edu> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 18:20:19 -0700
From: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Well the nature of their difference lies in  the need to support 
active documents . 

Just post to their mailing list . They seem to be a candid group.

http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Amaya/

A few of the key members from the Thot group joined the W3 consortium
and it looks like everyone stands a chance to benefit from the
exchange.

I would start by simply repeating what you posted which addresses
the heart of the issue. 

	Got Sgml 8) (twisted joke on the Milk industries tv AD logo
                     Got Milk!)
	Amancio
>From The Desk Of John Fieber :
> On Wed, 14 May 1997, Amancio Hasty wrote:
> 
> > when you get a chance, check out http://rah.star-gate.com/languages.html
> > it discusses the theory of their meta language thingy.
> 
> Hm...  I'm not sure what to think of this.  They seem to have
> expended a great deal of effort to re-invent SGML.  The S
> language implements most SGML concepts, but in an incompatible
> form with no obvious advantage over SGML.  Similarly the P and T
> languages look to be an implementation of the concepts in DSSSL,
> although in a more limited fashion.
> 
> So, the philosophy of Thot is more or less the same as SGML and
> DSSSL almost exactly, but with an independent implementation. 
> DSSSL is quite new (1996), but SGML has been around over a decade
> so I find this re-inventing of the wheel very puzzling and
> somewhat sad. 
> 
> I'll definately have to take a closer look at the code itself
> when I get a chance.
> 
> -john
>