Re: OmniMark Rant (was Re: [FWP] A fun bit of obfuscation)

[Bennett Todd <bet@mordor.net>]

I just wanted to lob in a little caution; while it's clear that OmniMark has
missed the ... well, mark in their marketing, and they're saddled with a pack
of advertising geniuses who should be rounded up and shot, it's not so clear
to me that the product should be dismissed out of hand. _I_ might not want to
use it, and neither may _you_, but there are a lot of respected people who
seem to like it.

I've been watching SGML for some years, using the Linuxdoc DTD for my own
documentation and keeping an eye on comp.text.sgml, and one thing seems clear:
OmniMark is a major and respected player in the SGML industry. As best I can
recall, the context in which its name comes up most often is doing SGML->SGML
transformations on an industrial scale. It could be that a DSSSL engine like
Jade, or the combination of an SGML parser (like NSGMLS) bound to a good
language (e.g. SGMLS.PM for a Perl binding) has replaced it, but for years it
seemed to be the tool professionals wielded when they had gigs of documents
validated against one DTD, and changing requirements forced a major revision
of the DTD.

All of which has nothing much to do with Perl. Anybody having fun with
SGMLS.PM, or any other SGML whacking modules for Perl?

-Bennett

==== Want to unsubscribe from Fun With Perl?  Well, if you insist...
==== Send email to <fwp-request@technofile.org> with message _body_
====   unsubscribe