W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > January 2000

RE: Frames and People With Napoleanic Issues >>

From: Dave J Woolley <DJW@bts.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 19:32:30 -0000
Message-ID: <81E4A2BC03CED111845100104B62AFB53F3F8F@stagecoach.bts.co.uk>
To: "'www-html@w3.org'" <www-html@w3.org>
> From:	Gulliver, Deanna XWAVE [SMTP:DeannaGulliver@xwavesolutions.com]
> To add a twist to this interesting perspective, there are clients out
> there that simply want frames. 
	I'd certainly tend to agree.  From a personal point
	of view, I think that accessibility and information
	are important for the web, but as an employee, I know
	that I get paid to produce a flashy product for IE4 or
	5, and if I were doing an external web site, I'd know
	that, as advertising, real information is the last thing
	that the page should communicate.

	Actually, I think the market demand is really for an
	interactive page description languague and it is just
	a historical accident (and the failure of Adobe to 
	provide free authoring tools to students - HTML used to be
	hand codeable, which is what, I think, established the
	market) that made that PDL HTML based.

	In the frames context, I think the effects of removing 
	frames and target= from XHTML will be:

	- browsers and authoring tools continue to support them
	  as though the standards hadn't changed; or

	- the market refuses to take up XHTML (which might find a 
	  niche in the markets where SGML was traditionally used); or

	- people simulate target= by using scripting, thus making the
	  pages less accessible, because you more or less need a 
	  general object model and Javascript interpreter to cope with
	  even stereotyped scripting because of the possiblity that
	  not every case fits the stereotype.

	The market role of HTML is not, in my view, the role that
	HTML attempted to target, but rather the things that the
	first HTML explicitly said it was not attempting to be.  (This
	is common in computing - a programming language is designed to
	do certain jobs very well, but then becomes fashionable and is
	extended to be a universal language, as complex as its predecessors,
	but different in detail.)
Received on Monday, 17 January 2000 14:36:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:52 UTC