Received: from localhost (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 652549F9EED for ; Sun, 10 Dec 2006 05:08:15 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 53518-10 for ; Sun, 10 Dec 2006 05:08:12 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7C0869F9392 for ; Sun, 10 Dec 2006 05:08:14 -0400 (AST) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 10 Dec 2006 09:08:13 -0000 Received: from dslb-084-063-060-162.pools.arcor-ip.net (EHLO colt.pezone.net) [84.63.60.162] by mail.gmx.net (mp020) with SMTP; 10 Dec 2006 10:08:13 +0100 X-Authenticated: #495269 From: Peter Eisentraut To: David Fetter Subject: Re: Switching to XML Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2006 10:08:09 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: Guillaume Lelarge , "Joshua D. Drake" , Josh Berkus , pgsql-docs@postgresql.org, David Blewett References: <4579720E.4000707@dawninglight.net> <457A71F8.6070001@lelarge.info> <20061210053926.GB19472@fetter.org> In-Reply-To: <20061210053926.GB19472@fetter.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200612101008.10366.peter_e@gmx.net> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-Archive-Number: 200612/75 X-Sequence-Number: 3998 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. 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. > It'll be nice to have the document building cycle shorter, but the > point here is that we need to enter the 21st century. That Tom found > a need to fork a document tool, i.e. take ownership of a whole large > piece of software, that being what forking means, is a neon sign that > means, "we're stuck with broken tools." And which nonbroken tools for creating print output do you have up your sleeve in the new XML world? And what is so wonderous about these tools that we can't use them today? -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/