W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > July 1996


From: Scott E. Preece <preece@predator.urbana.mcd.mot.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 1996 14:26:14 -0500
Message-Id: <199607021926.OAA28186@predator.urbana.mcd.mot.com>
To: papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca
Cc: reddik@thegroup.net, www-style@w3.org
 From: Paul Prescod <papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
| A style sheet is _not_ appropriate for the eccentric spacing of an eccentric
| poem. Neither is HTML. HTML cannot, and will never be the perfect langauge
| everything anyone wants to be. If such a language were possible, it would
| have been invented years ago.

So, who made you king of what was appropriate content?  If the
appropriate content model for HTML is just plain text in common document
structure, then most of the content of the Web is inappropriate for HTML
and the domain of HTML interest is the tiny subset of people who have
common-or-garden documents and aren't sophisticated enough to want
DocBook or other more detailed markup.

| PDF is perfect for a poem with eccentric layout needs and supported in
| browsers on all major GUI platforms.

Now that PDF is going native in the major browsers, it may well be a
better path for most of the content of the Web.  With page-by-page
serving and tools for indexing and extracting content, I'm not sure I
see what advantage HTML has anymore, for most authors.  It's too simple
for people who care about structure and too complicated for people who

SPACER is about as innocuous tag as I can imagine.  It can be happily
ignored by unaware browsers and does nothing to obscure the content from
tools.  So what's the beef?


scott preece
motorola/mcg urbana design center	1101 e. university, urbana, il   61801
phone:	217-384-8589			  fax:	217-384-8550
internet mail:	preece@urbana.mcd.mot.com
Received on Tuesday, 2 July 1996 15:24:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:40 UTC