Comparison of document markup languages
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Please help improve this article or section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (March 2008) |
The following tables compare general and technical information for a number of document markup languages. Please see the individual markup languages' articles for further information.
Contents |
[edit] General information
Basic general information about the markup languages: creator, version, etc.
[edit] Characteristics
Some characteristics of the markup languages.
[edit] Notes
- ^ An Emacs mode and a Mozilla extension are available.
- ^ Many markup languages have purposely avoided presentational markups. For markup languages based on SGML and XML, CSS is used as a presentation layer.
- ^ Presentational markup is deprecated as of XHTML 1.0 and no longer allowed as of XHTML 1.1
- ^ Presentational markup is deprecated as of HTML 4.0
- ^ MathML comes in two mark-up syntaxes: a semantic and a presentational.
- ^ uses Content MathML, OpenMath or other formats for formulae
- ^ Exact presentation of symbols can be specified in OMDoc; these specifications are used when transforming OMDoc to a presentational format.
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
- Comparison of XML schema for narrative documents (biased towards author's BNML schema and associated tools)
- Swordfish Translation Editor, a cross-platform CAT (Computer Assisted Translation) tool based on XLIFF 1.2 open standard published by OASIS that supports translation of Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA), DocBook, HyperText Markup Language (HTML), Maker Interchange Format (MIF), OpenDocument Format (ODF), Office Open XML (MS OOXML), Rich Text Format (RTF) and Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) files.