Re: deprecated tags in Wilbur & Cougar -Reply -Reply

marc@ckm.ucsf.edu
Wed, 7 Aug 1996 21:47:53 -0700


From: marc@ckm.ucsf.edu
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 1996 21:47:53 -0700
Message-Id: <199608080447.VAA21832@pele.ckm.ucsf.edu>
To: www-html@w3.org, www-style@w3.org
Subject: Re: deprecated tags in Wilbur & Cougar -Reply -Reply

Gavin wrote:
<SPAM CLASS=SPAM>SPAM</SPAM>
|I often use this when teaching people about DTD design and what is
|good markup. This DTD has uses, but I think we all agree that this is
|*not* the best way to markup important documents.

Who *ever* claimed that the evolution of HTML proceeded in the "best way"
by any measure?  The formal DTD came along after the usage curve had
began to grow asymptotic.

Some publishing applications don't require the burden of mastering another 
SGML application, and for those cases HTML should provide an optional entry 
point to generic structural markup.  

Complex collections will of course be marked up behind-the-server according
to much richer, application-specific DTDs, such as TEI or EAD.  But the 
cleanest scheme to preserve the most of that rich structural information 
from documents marked up in an arbitrary DTD during the down-translation 
to a delivery/presentation markup format as accessible and generic as HTML 
is to let the attributes do the talking.

In the future, will HTML become the DTD of Last Resort?

-marc
"HTML is not markup for the ages" -Stu Weibel