Re: Style Sheets for HTML
Christian L. Mogensen <mogens@CS.Stanford.EDU>
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Date: Sun, 29 May 1994 06:07:48 +0200
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Message-id: <9405290303.AA15935@Xenon.Stanford.EDU>
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: mogens@CS.Stanford.EDU
Originator: www-talk@info.cern.ch
Sender: www-talk@www0.cern.ch
Precedence: bulk
From: Christian L. Mogensen <mogens@CS.Stanford.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: Style Sheets for HTML
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Type: text
Content-Type: text
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
Dan Hinckley writes:
> Forgive me, but what's to prevent browser clients from being able to read
> .ps files; can http not point to a postscript file as it would any other
> non html file, and thus provide a gateway? Wouldn't this solve the
> publishers' problem, and keep HTML simpler?
Indeedy weedikins they can. But PS is notorious for its lack of
links and for looking grotty on a display (Ok - Display postscript
looks nice, but Ghostscript ain't it!)
In effect - we'd turn our web into a glorified FTP server, while we
want to link all this stuff together, and put annotations on it, and
display it on VT100 terminals. Decompiling postscript (especially
arbitrary postscript) is _hard_ and you lose a lot of content on
the way. ok: is this bold thing a header or is it a definition?
PS is not quite what we want. PDF is closer to the intersection of
the web and publishers wants. New PDF with links will be better.
Now if they would only give away the viewers PDF could flourish on
the web.
Christian "Opinionated grad student"