Portrait vs. Landscape (was Re: THEAD & TFOOT for columns)

Neil St.Laurent (neil@bigpic.com)
Fri, 15 Aug 1997 10:00:40 -0600

Message-Id: <199708151555.JAA01298@underworld.bigpic.com>
From: "Neil St.Laurent" <neil@bigpic.com>
To: Peter Flynn <pflynn@imbolc.ucc.ie>
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 10:00:40 -0600
CC: www-html@w3.org, www-style@w3.org
Subject: Portrait vs. Landscape (was Re: THEAD & TFOOT for columns)

> You're barking up the wrong tree. HTML wan't designed to do any kind
> of layout. That's a matter for browser and stylesheets. Nothing in
> HTML prohibits or encourages either portrait or landscape designs..

MAybe HTML 4.0 doesn't, nor does HTML in theory, but ALIGN=LEFT, 
ALIGN=right, are both portrait oriented.   Almost any place that has 
the ALIGN attribute was strictly for portrait, very few things 
have/support VALIGN to any usefulness.  Consider even:

<HR>, where's <VR>?

But it is true the pure SGML (not as implemented by HTML) doesn't 
prohibit a model that would allow for horizontal representation.

Style sheets, particularily CSS, gives virtually no possibility of 
doing any useful layout for landscape displays.

Float, clear, properties should have TOP,BOTTOM as attributes rather 
than just LEFT,RIGHT.

A lack of orphan control actually prevents CSS from being useful in 
any non-continuous vertical scrolling medium (such as print or 
horizontal display).
| Mortar: Advanced Web Development <http://bigpic.com/mortar/>
| Neil St.Laurent  neil@bigpic.com
| Big Picture Multimedia