Re: HTML spec

Dave_Raggett <dsr@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

Mail folder: WWW Talk Apr-Jun 1993 Archives
Next message: frans van hoesel: "Re: How do I use Xmosaic's ISMAP flag with CERN httpd"
Previous message: Marcus Speh: "How do I use Xmosaic's ISMAP flag with CERN httpd"
Reply: Jay C. Weber: "Re: HTML spec "
Reply: Marc Andreessen: "Re: HTML spec"
Reply: Marc Andreessen: "Re: HTML spec"
Reply: Christopher J. McRae: "Re: HTML spec "

From: Dave_Raggett <dsr@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Message-id: <9306211106.AA13111@manuel.hpl.hp.com>
Subject: Re: HTML spec
To: marca@ncsa.uiuc.edu
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 93 12:06:57 BST
Cc: www-talk@nxoc01.cern.ch
Mailer: Elm [revision: 66.36.1.1]

Marc says:

> I haven't had time to type up my feelings in any detail yet, but at this
> point I think that dealing with SGML in general is a complete waste of time
> and that we'd currently be a lot further along if we weren't burdened by the
> SGML baggage we've inherited and are still carrying.  99.99% of the people
> I talk to want to put rich documents online, want control over what it looks
> like, and don't give a damn about semantic markup or distinctions between
> document structure and appearance AT ALL; the other 0.01% are still
> grappling with this whole keyboard-monitor-mouse concept.)

So why don't we lobby Adobe to put in URL based links into its next version
of Postscript and go home now?

Seriously - how much interest is there in a non-proprietary, lightweight
extendable format derived from HTML? Am I barking up the wrong tree with
HTML+ ?

Dave Raggett