Re: coupla html+ possibilities

marca@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Marc Andreessen)
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 93 13:06:38 -0500
From: marca@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Marc Andreessen)
Message-id: <9307051806.AA11813@wintermute.ncsa.uiuc.edu>
To: "Peter Lister, Cranfield Computer Centre" <P.LISTER@mail.cranfield.ac.uk>
Cc: ccprl@mail.cranfield.ac.uk, www-talk@nxoc01.cern.ch
Subject: Re: coupla html+ possibilities
In-reply-to: <9307051626.AA05940@xdm039>
References: <9307051546.AA22621@xdm001>
	<9307051626.AA05940@xdm039>
X-Md4-Signature: 393ef6fd826eb836e0f4d0bc4c95c79b
Status: RO
"Peter Lister, Cranfield Computer Centre" writes:
> > If these are going to be universal bitmaps, then you
> > need to provide a specification so that people can
> > make equivalents for them on other browsers/platforms;
> > perhaps you need a universal bitmap format so we can
> > have the same appearance on diff platforms, and maybe you
> > need to define the intended semantics of the icons.
> 
> But please God, nobody invent another "universal" bitmap format.
> There are enough already. As far as I'm aware, that's the idea - a
> name which implies the meaning, i.e. "home-icon" would draw a
> standard picture of a little house, or "HOME" on a dumb terminal.

Yup...

It certainly may be that this is a bad idea, that each information
provider should provide his/her own set of bitmaps which are served
normally over the network as is done now, etc.  I just think it would
be nice if there were a fairly consistent "palette" of icons that
could be used liberally and would stand a good chance of being
represented in non-graphics displays as well... I think the user
interface of the overall system would benefit.

Marc