From: Gavin Nicol <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 01:12:03 GMT Message-Id: <199608140112.BAA19745@wiley.EBT.COM> To: email@example.com CC: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org> (message from Alan Karben on Tue, 13 Aug 1996 15:23:54 -0400) Subject: Re: Generic Markup > Yesterday: <subhed> --> <p><b> > Today: <subhed> --> <p class="subhed"><b> > >MSFT's implementation allows those who can easily manipulate their HTML >production system to make documents look as good as possible in both css and >non-css browsers. For example: Sure, DynaWeb has been able to do this for quite some time now. > <div class="FrontSection"> > <div class="EconomyPage"> > <div class="Summary"> > <p>Greenspan announced ... > >Generic Markup Solutions for browsers won't be useful if the competition >centers around just how content looks. Generic Markup's strengths lie in how >readers -- and not just authors -- could make that content act. This is one point I've been trying to make, the other is that people who create content should be allowed to use whatever representation they think is best.