Re: Interest in HTML Conformance?

wmperry@indiana.edu (William M. Perry)
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 1994 18:44:35 --100
Message-id: <m0psi3I-00005hC@monolith>
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: wmperry@indiana.edu
Originator: www-talk@info.cern.ch
Sender: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
Precedence: bulk
From: wmperry@indiana.edu (William M. Perry)
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: Interest in HTML Conformance?
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Length: 2344

>>>>> "b" == burchard  <burchard@geom.umn.edu> writes:

b> wmperry@indiana.edu (William M. Perry) writes:
>> I think the most 'featureful' browser should be used as the
>> standard.  Which would definitely have to be the excellent violaWWW.
>> It is real close to 100% HTML+ conformance (as is emacs-w3, but in
>> diff areas).

b> wmperry@indiana.edu (William M. Perry) writes:
>> W3 is 100% HTML compliant and the only HTML+ support missing now is
>> tables.

b> Really?  That would be great, but I think you are exaggerating.

b> For example, as far as I know, none of the "alternative" browsers
b> implement ANY of the provisions for interactive graphical input
b> specified by the standards -- a fundamental limitation.  There are
b> at least 3 to choose from:

   'Alternative' browsers?  All browsers are alternative.  I don't think
anyone came down from on high and dubbed anyone's browser as 'the end-all
and be-all official HTML browser'.  If any browser should be deemed
official, I'd have to say it should be Dave Raggetts browser, as he has
written the standard and the only browser to completley implement it.

b> HTML DTD 1.8: -- INPUTs of type "image" (equivalent to HTML+
b> "submit")

   Has this yet been 'adopted' as a new 'standard' of HTML?  As far as I am
aware, HTML was frozen quite a while ago and people were told to focus on
HTML+, which they have been.  The HTML 1.8 DTD is a hybrid between HTML and
HTML+, which is a bad idea I think.

   If the 'image' input type is put into the HTML+ spec, I will put it in
my browser.  Until then, I will work for using 'scribble'.

b> HTML+ DTD draft 21 Mar 1994:
b> -- INPUTs of type "submit" with a SRC attribute

   5 minutes work. tick... tock... done.

b> -- INPUTs of type "scribble"

   Just waiting for the support to pass events through an emacs window to a
subwindow I can loan to a suitably advanced helper application.   It will
be extremely easy to move to the 'conglomeration' of small apps approach
that was recently suggested.  Just added support for scribble using a
helper application.  Input of type 'audio' is just as trivial to add.

b> I am certainly glad to see your enthusiasm for the standards, and
b> look forward to continued improvements in compliance.

   HTML+ conformance yes, new 'standards' that people are still arguing
about, nope.

-Bill P.