Re: Frequently Requested Features

Jonathan Gapen (innuendo@execpc.com)
Thu, 20 Feb 1997 16:36:32 -0600


From: Jonathan Gapen <innuendo@execpc.com>
To: www-html@w3.org
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 16:36:32 -0600
Message-ID: <yam6990.1623.120726704@mail.execpc.com>
In-Reply-To: <pRKDz4uYOxuJ089yn@htmlhelp.com>
Subject: Re: Frequently Requested Features

Le 20-F=E9v-97, Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet a =E9crit:
>Yes. Here are a few:

    Haven't these features been discussed and dismissed on this list befo=
re? =

One more time:

>Page break

    Page breaks are impractical, because the page designer cannot know th=
e
size of the user's page.  These are best handled by a more intelligent
browser, or through style sheets.

>Include tag

    An include tag can't include HTML fragments, because that can easily =
cause
the whole document to be invalid code.  Instead, bug the software company=
 to
implement <OBJECT DATA=3D"..." TYPE=3D"text/html"> properly in the browse=
r.

>Netscape frames

    Netscape's frames design is very poorly conceived.  The idea could (a=
nd
should) be implemented in a much better fashion, if at all.

>Hide/block source

    Impossible.  Even if you could convince a browser to refuse to displa=
y the
source of a document, it still exists in the user's disk cache.  Also, ol=
der
browser versions will still show the source.  A crafty user may even teln=
et to
the HTTP port and send a request manually to get the HTML source.

>ALTURL/ALTSRC

    It seems that this would be better handled by higher level addressing=

schemes, because why should you be stuck with only two alternatives?

-- =

Jonathan Gapen <innuendo@execpc.com>
Some lead. Others follow. I'm lost.