Re: atx

Sean B. Palmer wrote:

>>I plan to use it so I never have to write HTML again. It
>>should also be forward-compatible to whatever Advanced
>>XHTML 5.0 idiocy the W3C comes up with
>>    
>>
>
>Well, I can certainly support the general reasoning there, but...
>
>* Why not use an HTML WYSIWYG editor? Well, except for the fact that
>there isn't a decent one in existence yet, that I know of. Sigh: it'd
>be such a timesaver for me (and seemingly you, too) if someone came up
>with a decent HTML editor.
>
Why not indeed.  Incidentally , what *is* the best WYSIWYG editor out 
there at the moment.  I use Mozilla composer, but it doesn't do CSS 
(that i know of)... nore does it allow for RDF descriptions (that i know 
of).

>>Here's the master plan:
>>
>>    atx for documents
>>
I think atx is cool but I think that every author would want to 
customize it for themselves.  

>>+ rdf (n3) for data
>>
I prefer to write RDF in Semenglish .

>>= no more XML! (bwahaha)
>>
I'll drink to that !

Hey .. Aaron, Sean and Me all in one email ... just like old times :)

Seth Russell
http://radio.weblogs.com/0113759/

Received on Tuesday, 4 February 2003 14:09:53 UTC