>>Hmm. I'm not sure I agree with this. XML seems perfectly suitable
to a wysiwyg editor precisely because of its strict rules. The main
reason most people use avoid "wizzy" HTML editors is because
most of them don't support the latest "tricks" of the trade. With
XML there are no tricks! Now, the styling might not take place in a
wizzy, but that's a different matter, isn't it?
Interesting. Maybe I'm missing something.
First, you're right that the tricks-of-the-trade problem did make it
difficult to create a satisfying wizzy HTML editor, but there was a deeper
problem, that you couldn't really see what the document might look like on
the reader's screen because of the wide amount of control the reader has on
font choices, window size, whether they're blind, or whatever... In other
words, HTML doesn't define a wizzy medium, therefore no wizzy editor is
really possible. It's not clear to me how XML overcomes that limit.
Now of course the vector graphics XML specs, when finished, will make that
possible, but only for that subset of XML. That's the whole purpose of
vector graphics, to be wizzy. But I thought we were talking about a general
purpose XML editor, for any kind of XML content.