Re: <PAGE> proposal

Arjun Ray (aray@pipeline.com)
Fri, 22 Dec 1995 18:25:33 -0500 (EST)


Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 18:25:33 -0500 (EST)
From: Arjun Ray <aray@pipeline.com>
Subject: Re: <PAGE> proposal
To: BearHeart/Bill Weinman <BearHeart@bearnet.com>
Cc: www-html@w3.org
In-Reply-To: <199512221955.NAA00375@primus.paranoia.com>
Message-Id: <Pine.3.89.9512221837.A19598-0100000@alpha>



On Fri, 22 Dec 1995, BearHeart/Bill Weinman wrote:

> At 02:00 pm 12/22/95 -0500, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> >This is a proposal for a simple extension to HTML.
> 
>    [ . . . ]
> 
> >I therefore propose a new tag, <PAGE>.  When the browser encounters this 
> >tag, it should fill the display area with blank lines to the bottom.  The
> ><PAGE> tag should also alter the scroll-forward behavior of the browser so that
> >the space created by <PAGE> expands during scrolling to fill the display 
> >area until it is entirely blank, at which point the next scroll-forward 
> >skips to-of-display to just past the <PAGE> tag.

what about scroll-backward behavior?

>    I like this proposal, but I would suggest that <PAGE> be 
> a container as this would fit in more with the style and spirit 
> of HTML. 
> [...]
>    Other containers, like <P> or the pointless kludge <DIV>, could 
> be used to temporarily modify the attributes of <PAGE> and then the 
> behavior would revert back to that of the <PAGE> when the suborniate 
> container is terminated. This could actually be a very elegant way 
> to implement some styles, although it's not a complete replacement for 
> a style-sheet. 

The pointless kludge may in fact be an answer, a Mike Meyer surmised.
Consider <DIV CLASS="Paged">...</DIV>. The semantics of the "paged" CLASS 
is that only one DIV is considered "viewable" at any time, i.e. as long 
as some part of a DIV is "visible", no other DIV segment should be.  


Regards,

Arjun