Re: The Final Word On HTML

Jason O'Brien (
Wed, 25 Sep 96 14:49:00 CDT

From: "Jason O'Brien" <>
To: Sean Howard <>
Cc: "'www'" <>
Subject: RE: The Final Word On HTML
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 96 14:49:00 CDT
Message-ID: <>

I think my point was lost here -- while I might have misspoken that HTML   
is a programming language, the real issue was to discuss that even as a   
markup language, HTML can and should be developed further to take the   
place of all the plug-ins we have -- slowly but surely, as more and more   
plug-ins have to be added, the Internet begins to move away from a   
standardized format into something where you have to have about 80   
different programs running just to see someone's web site -- that's why   
more "web designers" (I'm not sure what exactly you would like call those   
of us who do work hard with web design and hard coding) should support   
new tags that further multimedia and style support on the web -- the   
point of the Internet was for one standard -- HTML needs to be that   
standard -- it certainly has the capability to do so.

BTW, I have read your Ten Commandments a long time ago -- the only thing   
I can say is that everyone has got an opinion.

Jason O'Brien

From:  Sean Howard[]
Sent:  Wednesday, September 25, 1996 3:15 PM
To:  jaobrien
Subject:  Re: The Final Word On HTML


  I recommend reading my Ten Commandments of HTML FAQ.

  HTML is not a programming language.  But don't fret too much, a lot of
people make this mistake, even after working with HTML for some time.

  I'd be happy to go into more detail on why it is not a programming
language, but you will no doubt be swamped with them from the newsgroup.

Sean <DREAMING>you a happy HTML day</DREAMING>

At 11:50 AM 9/25/96 CDT, you wrote:
>Lately I have seen a lot of discussion from programmers in this group
>talking about what they think HTML is -- criticizing every new HTML
>development and every new item that Netscape or Microsoft might come up   

>with.    I have been coding HTML for just over a year now and I'm tired   

>of people saying HTML is only a rendering language.   HTML's solitary
>purpose is to exist as a standard programming language which allows for   

>the same viewing of material no matter where you are or on what computer   

>you access it.   As such, HTML should advance into other areas of
>multimedia, eventually eliminating a lot of the need for plug-ins --   
>is a very powerful programming language -- the problems today exist with   

>the standard idea -- Netscape and Microsoft keep developing tags which   

>only work on their browsers, making programming for the web a nightmare   

>in trying to determine exactly how your page is going to be viewed.
>  Part of the problems have been mentioned in the last couple of days,   

>with users having the ability to override your colors and fonts, have
>their window size set any way they'd like -- the problem is there is no   

>standard which seems to work.
>I have also seen people criticize only programming for the Netscape and   

>Microsoft environments -- Netscape controls about 80% of the browser
>market, Microsoft is second -- why not develop for these two?   The
>Internet's future will be decided by these two companies, like it or not   

>(I don't necessarily like that fact) and as more and more people begin   
>access the Internet for the first time, these are the two browsers that   

>people will be most likely to choose.   Anybody that is a forward   
>knows that the Internet is the most vastly changing aspect of computers   

>nowadays and there is no future in the past, as far as computing and
>programming is concerned.   The future of the Internet is multimedia, is   

>through presentation.   Yes, the textual aspects of the Internet will
>always be there -- but HTML as a language should advance along with all   

>of the other elements which will make up the future of the Internet into   

>a more robust language (yes, meaning more tags which can accomplish a   
>of multimedia features as well as more text styles) -- HTML will   
>to become a standard for publishing in more ways than just on the
>Internet --
>You know that the majority of people with computers have to upgrade
>almost every year their equipment (there are reasons nobody runs on a   
>anymore) so the same holds true for the browsers -- there is no possible   

>way to make sure your web pages are valid with every single way that
>someone is going to view them (it's physically impossible) -- so the   
>solution is to design for the majority of the audience that's going to   
>viewing them -- through Netscape and Internet Explorer -- like it or   
>that's where the future of the Internet lies.
>Jason O'Brien