Re: Header, Footer, and Sidebars

Steve Knoblock (knoblock@worldnet.att.net)
Sun, 30 Nov 1997 17:43:38 -0500


Message-Id: <3.0.32.19971130173931.00b9341c@postoffice.worldnet.att.net>
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 17:43:38 -0500
To: www-html@w3.org, www-style@w3.org
From: Steve Knoblock <knoblock@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Header, Footer, and Sidebars

>But it does make sense for combining groups of modular, self contained
>documents into a compound presentation. This allows greater flexibility of
>combination without worrying whether the 'resulting document' is valid.

I accept that. It appears OBJECT fulfills most of the needs I foresee, if
authors can rely on user changes to the default style sheet being applied
to both the document and the document within the OBJECT element. I think
including a table of contents fits the description of modular content--I'm
not so concerned with arbitrary fragments because of the difficulty of
validation.  This started with my concern that if you allow HTML inclusion,
user changes to default styles ought to appear in the included document.

>My understanding, having talked with several of the authors, is that this
>was not a major design goal. Rather, replacing multiple ways to do the
>same thing with a single agreed way.

Perhaps I was thinking OBJECT would fit nicely in with other attempts to
reduce net traffic, such as CSS itself is advertised to do. I understand
the motivation was to create a single method for including applets and
other media objects. And appreciate the efforts and goals of that project,
given the experience of trying to add sound to my pages in a cross-browser
way.

Steve

   _/ Steve Knoblock                      mailto:editor@city-gallery.com
   _/ City Gallery                            http://www.city-gallery.com/
   _/ Member NSA               http://www.3d-web.com/nsa/nsa.htm