Re: [HTML 4.0 draft] (further) comments on ACRONYM

Stephanos Piperoglou (
Mon, 14 Jul 1997 14:23:17 +0300 (EET DST)

Date: Mon, 14 Jul 1997 14:23:17 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Stephanos Piperoglou <>
Subject: Re: [HTML 4.0 draft] (further) comments on ACRONYM 
In-Reply-To: <>
Message-ID: <>

On Fri, 11 Jul 1997, Aymeric Poulain Maubant wrote:

> Well, I was thinking of a large document made of many HTML files with
> eavily use of acronyms. 

I get annoyed when people bring forth this kind of examples. Not with the
people, though (i.e., I'm not annoyed with you :)), but with server vendors.

That's right, server vendors.

A big, big blight on this Web has been the fact that servers have promoted
the idea that the primary way to serve a series of documents on the Web is
to have a physical directory structure on a file system and map the URL to a
file. Hardcoded HTML is not the way to go, people.

In "a large document made of many HTML files", you would have to be rather
stupid to maintain it as such! I've said this before on this list, but I
have to repeat. Keep your document in a format that does this kind of thing,
there are hundreds of them around. Then dump it to HTML using a filter,
either with every update (i.e. make the tree of HTML files and give them to
the server) or dynamically (i.e. with a CGI binary that serves an HTML
document created on the fly from your source according to the URL it
recieved). If you need to keep track of multiple acronyms, common
stylesheets, a complex system of cross-referenced hyperlinks, a dynamically
created table of contents, or whatever, you can do this in your native
format and keep HTML as an output format.

I need to write a program to demonstrate... I'll be back with you in a week.

    Stephanos "Pippis" Piperoglou -
All I wanted in my life was a little love and a lot of money. In that order.
                [ Failure is a crime. Defeat; an atrocity! ]

                                                   ...oof porothika