Excuse me for just falling into the middle of this discussion,
On Wed, 9 Sep 1998 15:29:49 -0400, Arthur Smith <apsmith_at_APS.ORG> wrote:
>Several issues have been brought up on PDF vs SGML. It should be mentioned
>that PDF is as open as PostScript.
I would personally be in favor of having some ML as a standard for publishing
for all the mentioned reasons, it's easier to maintain, to translate, to
index etc. PDF doesn't readily have these options.
Another point of interest I would say is that the de facto standard for
writing/publishing in the sciences in LaTeX, as witnessed by the number
of journals that accept LaTeX input, the Eprints archive that consists of
mainly LaTeX based sources. Therefor part of the debate about PDF vs ML
seems a bit in vain. To me it seems unlikely and undesirable to change
a winning team so to speak. Mark up-languages have the future because
they can really be an open standard and are easily portable.
ingmar visser
ingmar_at_dds.nl
http://macnet007.psy.uva.nl/Users/Ingmar/
Received on Tue Aug 25 1998 - 19:17:43 BST