Re: animation frenzy

David Perrell (davidp@earthlink.net)
Wed, 18 Dec 1996 12:28:54 -0800


Message-Id: <199612182031.MAA10097@denmark.it.earthlink.net>
From: "David Perrell" <davidp@earthlink.net>
To: "Simone Demmel" <neko@greenie.muc.de>
Cc: <innuendo@execpc.com>, <www-html@w3.org>
Subject: Re: animation frenzy
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 12:28:54 -0800

> > MSIE has more powerful layout tools than NSN.
Simone Demmel wrote:
> And what does this help me, if I know only 50% of the internet can
enjoy
> my page? How about a 'back to the roots'? Only HTML2.0 or 3.2 - what
about
> 3.2 (Wilbur? any news? Had it become an officoal standard now or is
it
> also left as a 'working draft'?)

Good point. But MS deserves a plug for implementing Cascading Style
Sheets. If Netscape keeps the promise to do the same then expanding the
HTML standard won't matter so much. Style sheets work fine with only
HTML2.0 tags.

HTML has been a mess for a long time, and WebTV just upped the disorder
level. Post-Xmas, WebTV may be a significant part of browser traffic,
and consumer-oriented sites will have to support new tags to be
competitive. So of what use is the current 3.2 spec? MS and NS may be
looking at WebTV as they plan their next HTML enhancements.

IMO, WebTV has also complicated CSS1 development. Properties such as
transparency are pretty straightforward additions, but a non-scrolling
<SIDEBAR> is beyond the current formatting model.

I'm not yet familiar with XLM (eXtensible Markup Language)[1], but it
looks like it could be a sensible solution to tag soup. Authors should
be free to declare their own tags based on a standard set of display
properties, with the only concern being what properties the target UAs
support.

David Perrell

[1]   http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/TR/WD-xml-961114.html