Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!rpi!uupsi!sunic!liuida!prosys!ath
From: ath@prosys.se (Anders Thulin)
Newsgroups: comp.text
Subject: Re: SGML question
Keywords: SGML, ambiguity
Message-ID: <582@helios.prosys.se>
Date: 2 Sep 90 10:42:49 GMT
References: <555@helios.prosys.se> <146@thor.UUCP>
Organization: Telesoft AB, Teknikringen 2A, S-583 30 Linkoping, Sweden
Lines: 26

In article <146@thor.UUCP> scjones@thor.UUCP (Larry Jones) writes:
>In article <555@helios.prosys.se>, ath@prosys.se (Anders Thulin) writes:
>> I've been trying to make sense of the SGML standard. I'm beginning to
>> think that it shouldn't be done at home, and only attempted by highly
>> trained professionals :-,
>
><flame>
>[ ... ] In addition, the standard contains a
>number of errors, inconsistencies, ambiguities, and violations of
>the formalisms. 
></flame>

Glad to hear it ... sort of ... well, ...  :-/

Is there any list of these errors, etc floating around? It would
probably be a help to the readers of comp.text.sgml to have one
around. Alternatively, can we compile one? I'm thinking of sending
the CON and CTX questions to ISO for formal interpretation. A list
of bugs in the standard might provide sufficient reason to revise
it.

Or perhaps this has been tried earlier without success?

-- 
Anders Thulin       ath@prosys.se   {uunet,mcsun}!sunic!prosys!ath
Telesoft Europe AB, Teknikringen 2B, S-583 30 Linkoping, Sweden