Talk:Comparison of document markup languages
Page contents not supported in other languages.
 | This article is ratedList-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
What aboutLout? --Mecanismo19:56, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't RTF based on TeX? At least the syntax is clearly isnpired on it. I don't have any references, though. --193.86.75.12411:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
MIF was available with the first release of FrameMaker in 1986, and Adobe did NOT invent it. It was developed by Frame Technology Corporation which also produced FrameMaker. Adobe acquired Frame Technology in 1995. This is documented athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framemaker. A better history is found athttp://www.daube.ch/docu/fmhist00.html
What is structural markup? DocBook and DITA clearly create structural markup. It is very doubtful that HTML, XHTML 1.0 and similar XML grammars create structural markup. They do not define any meaningful document structure. Almost anything can occur in any order. The table showing all the listed DTDs as providing structural markup is meaningless.
S1000D is one big international standard for technical publications, especially used in the aerospace and defence industry. Schema and stylesheets are publically available.
It might be quoted in the article too.
Objection. TheComparison of OpenDocument and Microsoft Office Open XML formats article appears to contain a large amount of relevant information that cannot be condensed into table form. Much of this information would be lost if the merger took place. —gorgan_almighty11:26, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A better place for such information about the ODF vs OOXML debate ishttp://www.iosn.net/open-standards/organizations/ODFA%20UKAG%20Technical%20White%20Paper.pdfThis is much more technically detailed and less politicised than the proposed merge. Perhaps a reference to the above pdf would be sufficient for this site.
The ODF/XML formats are very highly publicized, and as such deserve their own article.
Object to merge. There is heavy politics and computer related news reports specifically about competition between these two formats. OOXML was created as a response to ODF and this article is necessary. --AlexOvShaolin02:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have tagged "Comparison of OpenDocument and Office Open XML licensing" to merge to "Comparison of OpenDocument and Office Open XML formats". I think this would make more sense than merging either of those articles to here. I do think that the "List of document markup languages" can be merged with this article to some advantage. -Bcharles21:10, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't find this information particularly useful or interesting, but maybe I'm in the minority. In any case, what usefulness the information has depends on it being strictly accurate. But I think the column is unlikely to stay accurate for very long. New versions will be released often, and no one will think to update the article accordingly. Therefore I suggest that the column be deleted. —134.242.21.25419:00, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The term "control code", as used in the markup type column, is not explained although Wikipedia in general redirects it to "control character". That interpretation is however incorrect in at least the case of TeX, and I think also nroff.81.231.39.16115:37, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I tagged this article with{{expand}} template. I think that it can be expanded with i.e. compability tables, etc. I'm not really into this subject, but this table looks kinda small for me, and does not contain much information.Hołek҉08:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that renaming theCreator column toMaintainer would be more accurate. Some standards have been created by one company, and their stewardship have later been transfered to another organization. For example, if MIF were standardized by ECMA, the creator would remain Frame, but the maintainer would become ECMA. Or HTML was invented by Tim Berners-Lee, but is maintained by W3C. If nobody object this (small) change, I will do it in a few days.Hervegirod (talk)09:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Given the involvement of Tim Berners-Lee in the DARPA project at MIT, it seems rather odd that the MIT Curl web content markup language of Steve Ward and others (now www.curl.com) is not in this comparison.MIT spun-off Curl which is now part of Sumisho.On the Document Markup Languages page, Curl is only in the SEE ALSO section.— Precedingunsigned comment added byGrshiplett (talk •contribs)17:39, 15 March 2011 (UTC) G. Robert Shiplett 17:37, 15 March 2011 (UTC)— Precedingunsigned comment added byGrshiplett (talk •contribs)[reply]
Lillypond but no ABC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abc_notation)??—Precedingunsigned comment added by68.33.14.86 (talk)01:45, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What about the default document markup language for the most popular office suite on the market? Shouldn't Microsoft's .docx format be on this list?— Precedingunsigned comment added by134.193.54.58 (talk)23:09, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking a round and could not find Creole on the page or in the tables. I will add it unless there is a reason not toTharple (talk)19:13, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link onComparison of document markup languages. Please take a moment to reviewmy edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visitthis simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored byInternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other thanregular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editorshave permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see theRfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template{{source check}}(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug)16:58, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And its page says this explicitlyhere: "RTF is a data format for saving and sharing documents, not a markup language; it is not intended for intuitive and easy typing by a human."— Precedingunsigned comment added byJsilverst (talk •contribs)16:46, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've updated the article to addGML andLaTeX, and that raised a general question. When one language is an extension of another, e.g., roff/troff, TeX/LaTeX, should there be a single consolidated entry or separate entries. For the nonce I've included GML with Script and LaTeX with TeX.
I've also added a tag asking for an explanation ofcontrol code andtag; as far as I can tell, the labeling is arbitrary. Markup such as.p,<p> and\usepackage certainly appear to be of the same character.Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk)20:03, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Some languages listed in the table include an "Open format?" section in their template. This would be a useful comparison to add to the table.Aaronshenhao (talk)10:51, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If nobody opposes the idea, in a few days I will includeMarkedly Structured Text (MyST) to this list. It's a superset of CommonMark Markdown created in 2022.Akira - Cleber Akira Nakandakare (talk)13:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
