From: Gavin Nicol <email@example.com> Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 00:22:51 GMT Message-Id: <199608130022.AAA02862@wiley.EBT.COM> To: firstname.lastname@example.org CC: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org In-reply-to: <9608121129.ZM8807@gaia.ckm.ucsf.edu> (email@example.com) Subject: Re: Generic Markup >Wait a sec. You said earlier that there was, for all intents and >purposes, slim difference in the task of processing structure >expressed through GI's or through attributes. If its the same >difference in processing, then how can it adversely affect the >deployment of sounder solutions? Sigh. Who do you think *really* controls what people implement? It's the people creating *content*, not browser writers. If a CLASS-based solution is deployed, and a lot of content is created that makes extensive use of it, then you have a lot of momentum for people to continue doing so. It the *program* level, there's not a lot of difference, but for where the WWW goes in the future, there's a world of difference. It's tru that GI-based systems should be able to do everything CLASS-based systems can do (and for that matter, they can even use CLASS if they want to, in that framework), and more, but it's primarily a question of guiding users toward a more capable future. >With the amount of effort already expended over the past 1.5 yr on >CSS, are you suggesting that be thrown away even though a SGML ERB >has just began working towards what might end up looking like your >favored solution? I resent the implication of that statement. Many people know that while I may be somewhat stubborn, it's only because I want to have powerful, flexible systems that can *interoperate*. CSS does not need to be tossed at all (though DSSSL is preferable). As I said before, GI's + CSS is fairly powerful (though some limitations in CSS make it difficult to use truly arbitrary markup, it will work for most important cases, and achieve reasonable results. >Maturing, source-code available implementations of CLASS exist right >now. Can you say the same about DSSSL (lite) or other SGML-style >proposed systems? Yes.