Re: Suppressed content in HEAD: myth or reality?
Alex Hopmann (hopmann@holonet.net)
Wed, 3 May 95 23:23:54 EDT
On May 3, 4:06pm, Dan Connolly wrote:
>> We've got a little more work to do on HTML so that it can represent
>> conventional word-processing documents, and then we should close
>> the book and move on.
>Lou Montulli writes:
>I completely disagree. HTML is capible of defining completely
>new dynamic interfaces and unique electronic-only styles. We
>should be expanding HTML to take advantage of it's medium.
Sorry to waste list bandwidth like this, but I agree strongly with that I
think Lou is trying to say. HTML is so close to being able to do everything
we need for a wide variety of of online information needs. I reject the
notion that just because we want more presentation control we should be
abandoning the many benifits of HTML, and probably implementing something
thats more complicated in the first place. I think one of HTML's strongest
points is that it never has been just presentation or just content markup.
Its really cool to be able to have documents that look good on different
window sizes. Its really cool to be able to have smart documents that know
alot about their own structure. Its also equally cool to have documents that
look really cool. (Ok, sorry again for using the word cool too many times in
the same sentence).
Oh, did I mention that its also really cool to have documents that are
interoperable? This doesnt necessarily mean that it looks exactelly the same
in your program as it does in mine. But it means that it looks good in both.
Alex Hopmann
ResNova Software, Inc.
hopmann@holonet.net