<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The case against HTML in OpenReader</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.teleread.org/2006/06/13/the-case-against-html-in-openreader/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.teleread.org/2006/06/13/the-case-against-html-in-openreader/</link>
	<description>News &#38; views on e-books, libraries, publishing and related topics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:00:52 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Idiotprogrammer &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Ebook Creation Links</title>
		<link>http://www.teleread.org/2006/06/13/the-case-against-html-in-openreader/comment-page-1/#comment-76426</link>
		<dc:creator>Idiotprogrammer &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Ebook Creation Links</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Aug 2006 00:19:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=5025#comment-76426</guid>
		<description>[...] For HTML in OpenReader/ Against HTML in OpenReader [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] For HTML in OpenReader/ Against HTML in OpenReader [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roger Sperberg</title>
		<link>http://www.teleread.org/2006/06/13/the-case-against-html-in-openreader/comment-page-1/#comment-62768</link>
		<dc:creator>Roger Sperberg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jun 2006 03:47:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=5025#comment-62768</guid>
		<description>Of the text-based e-book formats (I&#039;m excluding PDF and Sophie&#039;s predecessor, TK3), the only non-HTML-based format I&#039;m familiar with is FictionBook2. And yet none of them provide the capabilities you can find in a web browser. I just don&#039;t understand why we are having to argue so strenuously at this point in time to move on from HTML.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of the text-based e-book formats (I&#8217;m excluding PDF and Sophie&#8217;s predecessor, TK3), the only non-HTML-based format I&#8217;m familiar with is FictionBook2. And yet none of them provide the capabilities you can find in a web browser. I just don&#8217;t understand why we are having to argue so strenuously at this point in time to move on from HTML.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: alex dante</title>
		<link>http://www.teleread.org/2006/06/13/the-case-against-html-in-openreader/comment-page-1/#comment-62766</link>
		<dc:creator>alex dante</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jun 2006 03:31:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=5025#comment-62766</guid>
		<description>Er, that should be: &quot;The example you gave in a previous article over the usage of  the tag &#039;ingredient&#039; over the necessity of the tag &#039;li&#039; captured this perfectly.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Er, that should be: &#8220;The example you gave in a previous article over the usage of  the tag &#8216;ingredient&#8217; over the necessity of the tag &#8216;li&#8217; captured this perfectly.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: alex dante</title>
		<link>http://www.teleread.org/2006/06/13/the-case-against-html-in-openreader/comment-page-1/#comment-62765</link>
		<dc:creator>alex dante</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jun 2006 03:27:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=5025#comment-62765</guid>
		<description>Well stated, Roger. 

It frustrates me watching &quot;easier&quot; known standards like HTML get picked up because the flexibility offered by XML is too &quot;complicated&quot;; the &quot;easier&quot; option *always* grows in an inelegant way to cover the same functionality , as the implimentors begin to encounter the same problems that XML is meant to address. The example you gave in a previous article over the usage of  over the necessity of  captured this perfectly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well stated, Roger. </p>
<p>It frustrates me watching &#8220;easier&#8221; known standards like HTML get picked up because the flexibility offered by XML is too &#8220;complicated&#8221;; the &#8220;easier&#8221; option *always* grows in an inelegant way to cover the same functionality , as the implimentors begin to encounter the same problems that XML is meant to address. The example you gave in a previous article over the usage of  over the necessity of  captured this perfectly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
