Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 19:42:42 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199703230042.TAA08104@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> From: "nemo/Joel N. Weber II" <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org CC: email@example.com In-reply-to: <3334765A.13A6@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> (message from Paul Prescod on Subject: Re: HTML should not be a file format, but an output format Date: Sat, 22 Mar 1997 19:16:26 -0500 From: Paul Prescod <firstname.lastname@example.org> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.0b2 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <199703222254.RAA07910@duality.gnu.ai.mit.edu> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-List-URL: http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/MarkUp/Forums#www-html X-See-Also: http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/MarkUp/ Resent-From: email@example.com X-Mailing-List: <firstname.lastname@example.org> archive/latest/7617 X-Loop: email@example.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Resent-Sender: email@example.com Precedence: list nemo/Joel N. Weber II wrote: > So I conclude that something standard like HTML is a great storage format. Something standard, yes. HTML, no. If HTML is such a perfect storage format why are you hesitating at converting your documents into it? HTML is not exactly perfect for word processing. But HTML is perfect for the web. > But I don't see why one file == one page ever causes lossage on the web. It doesn't. It is just inconvenient. File breakup of information never causes lossage -- files can always be "cat"ted. One file per page in a DTP program wouldn't cause lossage either: the word processor would just have to manage overflow from one page to another by shifting the overflow of one file to another. But that would be inconvenient, just as one file per page is inconvenient on the Web. I still don't see why one file per page is inconvinient on the web.