Re: [Bug-gnupedia] Re: Classification difficulty and incompletene ss

[Thomas E. Vaughan]

On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 01:47:32PM -0000, Duncan Lock wrote:
>
> I don't know much about DocBook (I know what it is I just haven't
> used it, although I plan to.) You sound like you do - would it be possible/
> desirable to use DocBook as it stands for encyclopaedia articles, in your
> opinion?

I keep piping up about this because, if we are really serious, then we NEED
to be able to support serious math content in the best possible way.  If
each article must have only a single, unified <content> section that only
supports a subset of HTML, then are we ruling out the possibility that an
article might have several HTML nodes, as in the default output of
latex2html?  And how many HTML tags shall we support?  I still don't know
how MathML will fit into all of this.

In a previous message, I tried to bring up for discussion the issue of just
replacing the <content> section with a URL to a page that the author
provides.  At least at first, this would give scalability and reduce the
central resource requirements.

-- 
Thomas E. Vaughan <address@hidden>
CIMMS/NSSL, Norman, OK, USA