- From: David Perrell <davidp@earthlink.net>
- Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 13:33:29 -0700
- To: "Albert Lunde" <Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu>, <www-html@w3.org>
Albert Lunde wrote: > One either has to stay within the rules of SGML _or_ produce > a formal description of how to go outside them. Without > a formalism, it's just a pile of hacks. The formalism itself should not be a hack. If a script cannot currently be legal SGML content, then either a content type should be devised that works or SCRIPT should not be formalized in its current form at all. > (I'm currently unimpressed by Javascript: the server administration > web pages generated by a demo version of the Netscape server > periodically crashed a copy of Netscape 2.02 we were using > to access them. Is it fair to say "We must strive for perfection to achieve excellence!" is not NS's corporate credo? These are the foresight-challenged folks who have spit out a veritable cornucopia of dysfunctional tags that do not work in a consistent fashion. David Perrell
Received on Monday, 29 July 1996 16:37:03 UTC