brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) (10/08/90)
Shouldn't it be possible to implement SGML in TeX? Among other things, this would give SGML an opportunity for wide use---which it doesn't really deserve, but that's a side issue. ---Dan
dhosek@frigga.claremont.edu (Hosek, Donald A.) (10/09/90)
In article <3745:Oct805:47:1890@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>, brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes... >Shouldn't it be possible to implement SGML in TeX? Among other things, >this would give SGML an opportunity for wide use---which it doesn't >really deserve, but that's a side issue. Oh sure. TeX is Turing-complete. It's possible to implement _anything_ in TeX (ask Andrew Marc Greene ;-). Whether it would be practical is a whole other issue. The general approach taken is to run an SGML parser which translates the markup into TeX commands. -dh --- Don Hosek TeX, LaTeX, and Metafont support, consulting dhosek@ymir.claremont.edu installation and production work. dhosek@ymir.bitnet Free Estimates. uunet!jarthur!ymir Phone: 714-625-0147 finger dhosek@ymir.claremont.edu for more info
eijkhout@s41.csrd.uiuc.edu (Victor Eijkhout) (10/09/90)
brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes: >Shouldn't it be possible to implement SGML in TeX? Among other things, >this would give SGML an opportunity for wide use---which it doesn't >really deserve, but that's a side issue. Just for fun I implemented (with Nico Poppelier) a simple DTD in TeX. Not translating: just changing the syntax of TeX a bit and writing clever macros. Of course it was a *simple* DTD, but still. This is not the way to do it, however. TeX being the weird programming language it is, you'd better write a translator in C or Pascal or so. >---Dan Victor
spqr@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Sebastian Rahtz) (10/09/90)
In article <3745:Oct805:47:1890@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
Shouldn't it be possible to implement SGML in TeX? Among other things,
this would give SGML
I am not sure what you mean; in the simplest case, are you saying
`write an SGML DTD which describes LaTeX'? if so, it could be done,
I think, if you adopt the widest possible interpretation of the
syntax. Or do you mean write a (La)TeX macro package that looked like
a common SGML DTD? Remember that SGML isn't a piece of software, so
you can't implement it! the the trouble with TeX is the ease with which
the user can define new commands...
an opportunity for wide use---which it doesn't
really deserve, but that's a side issue.
Is SGML *designed* for widespread use? so far as I am concerned, its a
system for describing documents for interchange with other people.
Therefore I will carry on writing in TeX for my own purposes and if I
ever want to offer the document to the world, I'll make it conform to
SGML-itis and find a DTD. Since I (and all other LaTeX and troff -mm
and scribe users) have been writing generic markup for years, there
should be no problem :-} ... except describing the syntax of LaTeX
unequivocally.
--
Sebastian Rahtz S.Rahtz@uk.ac.soton.ecs (JANET)
Computer Science S.Rahtz@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Bitnet)
Southampton S09 5NH, UK S.Rahtz@sot-ecs.uucp (uucp)ath@prosys.se (Anders Thulin) (10/09/90)
In article <3745:Oct805:47:1890@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes: >Shouldn't it be possible to implement SGML in TeX? It might be possible to implement some kind of pseudo-SGML, that is something which would look like a SGML document, without actually being one. One part of a SGML document is the Document Type Declaration (the DTD) which specifies the syntax of the document text: in which order tags come, if certain tags must follow other tags and so on. Implementing this in TeX is probably not worth while. It would probably be easier to adapt the NIST SGML parser to spit out TeX code instead of parsed SGML. -- Anders Thulin ath@prosys.se {uunet,mcsun}!sunic!prosys!ath Telesoft Europe AB, Teknikringen 2B, S-583 30 Linkoping, Sweden
iwm@doc.ic.ac.uk (Ian Moor) (10/10/90)
I used to use GML (which I presume is (was) related to SGML), from Waterloo,
this was implemented in Waterloo Script (somewhat like runoff). They added one
feature to Script to allow commands to be anywhere in the text, not just line
beginnings. It should be possible to use TeX, which is rather more versatile.
In my opinion, the real problem is error reporting. Assuming that the
implementation is done by use of macros (\def), SMGL errors will often result
in reports of errors by TeX in terms of the generated code. This can be seen
to some degree in LaTeX, but I suspect that SMGL, being more configurable
might produce more confusing reports.
Pick a versatile lexer/parser generator or perhaps a Macroprocessor like
ML/1 and do a translation to TeX.
--
Ian W Moor
ARPA: iwm@doc.ic.ac.uk
JANET: iwm@uk.ac.ic.doc
Department of Computing, (The skin is mightier than the banana)
Imperial College.
180 Queensgate
London SW7 UK. tim@maths.tcd.ie (Timothy Murphy) (10/14/90)
In <3745:Oct805:47:1890@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes: >Shouldn't it be possible to implement SGML in TeX? Among other things, >this would give SGML an opportunity for wide use---which it doesn't >really deserve, but that's a side issue. A speaker at the Cork conference -- I think it was Victor Eijkhout (u641001@hnykun11.bitnet) -- claimed to have done exactly that, if I understood him correctly. -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: tim@maths.tcd.ie