Re: [Bug-gnupedia] Design proposal

[James Dennett]

Tom Chance wrote:
> 
> Plus of course if we swapped systems, they'd have to
> be compatible or easily interchangeable. I've been
> talking to RMS who agrees that it would be best to
> keep it simple with HTML (not XML or other text
> display technologies), not only because it will work
> with any browser (even lynx!) but also because it will
> be easy to change into other formats should we wish
> to. Especially easy if we display with HTML
> (compatible) and save data with a database, not a
> large number of files.
> 
> Tom Chance

Odd.

XML is easier to convert from than pre-XML HTML.
(Current HTML *is* XML, so that would be a possibility.)

If we want to be able to convert to other formats
easily then XML files on disk are the safest bet.
Simpler than any database, and parsed by more tools
than about any other format.

-- James Dennett <address@hidden>