[DOC-SIG] Re: [PSA MEMBERS] [XML] Notes on the Tutorial's markup
Tue, 11 Nov 1997 19:30:49 -0500 (EST)
> > I think that when push comes to shove, whoever has to type this stuff
> > should vote in favour of SGML. XML means a <EMPH>lot</EMPH> of extra
> > typing, and SGML offers a <EMPH/lot/ of <>short cuts</>.
> Let me request a reality check here, before you guys get all carried
> Either choice sounds really bad to me. I've come to really hate the
> idea of having to type raw SGML. For me, SGML is great as an
> intermediate format -- I can generate it and I can parse it. But I
> don't want to type it. It sounds like XML is no better.
> There is an existing standard for doc strings (although almost nobody
> uses it), I believe it's called "stext", which minimizes markup.
At the point that you have commented upon, we were discussing the library
reference, which is now in some TeX variant, right?
DOC-SIG - SIG for the Python Documentation Project
send messages to: email@example.com
administrivia to: firstname.lastname@example.org