Re: microsoftisms after netscapeisms ?

Marcelo Magallon (mmagallo@efis.ucr.ac.cr)
Sat, 13 Jan 1996 10:19:50 -0600 (CST)


Date: Sat, 13 Jan 1996 10:19:50 -0600 (CST)
From: Marcelo Magallon <mmagallo@efis.ucr.ac.cr>
To: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: microsoftisms after netscapeisms ?
In-Reply-To: <199601121839.TAA16285@everest.cst.cnes.fr>
Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.3.91.960113101136.14800B-100000@simula.efis.ucr.ac.cr>

On Fri, 12 Jan 1996, Christophe JOUAN wrote:

> Are they microsoftisms (just like netscape does)?

yes, they are.

> Are they part of suggestions that microsoft wants to propose to w3c?

I don't think so... of course, I don't know what goes on inside MS or 
W3C, but I doubt MS wants to make ANY suggestions. They just go and 
implement whatever they think is "needed", just as NS did.

> Or will we (poor HTML developpers) have to cope with as many HTML as 
> there are viewers?

Poor HTML developers, they'll have to. I *think* January's issue of 
Netguide addresses some of this... we need some sort of standard, because 
I cann't tell visitors of our server, "ok, this page does fine with NS, 
this one with IE, this one ...". Neither can I write a page for every 
single browser in existance, and obviously, going for the lowest common 
denominator (aka, HTML 1.0, I think), is NOT a solution. Maybe big 
companies like Time Warner can afford doing that, but big-company-owned 
is not what I think of the Internet nor the WWW.

Just my opinion.

=Marcelo===============
mmagallo@efis.ucr.ac.cr