W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2003

Re: Should we adapt WYSIWYG in CSS?

From: GS <junkmail.gs@c2i.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 07:07:54 +0100
Message-ID: <000701c2dd5d$e393b380$c657d8c1@edda>
To: <www-style@w3.org>
As a Reply to:  David Woolley, Sun, 23 Feb 2003 19:31:36 +0000 (GMT)

>This is basically the structuralist-presentationalist argument, which is
>empirically unwinnable. However taking one particular point.
>> The historical web as an information library only, is outdated.  
>I think there is behind this a fallacy that the progression was from
>non-WYSIWYG to WYSIWYG, whereas, the radical part of the original web
>was actually a move to reject WYSIWYG, which long predated HTML.

Do HTML need to be contradictory to WYSIWYG? 
I think that there might be possible to make a symbiose of those
in such a way that the Web becomes better and more easy to use.

>I'd also argue that you shouldn't use "web" to refer to sites which are
>not active parts of the web, expecting incoming links from search engines,
>but rarely linking out themselves.  I think the true web sites are 
>information library ones, and what are popularly called web sites are 
>actually the information resources that the web itself was trying to
>locate, and typically weren't in HTML.

Som web documents has a multipurpose. The same HTML document 
used on the net becomes the tool both online and offline to handle the 
dayly use of the information embedded in it, and with embedded links 
to internet for access to related or additional information.

I think that those multipurpose documents being both web 
and resource, deserves to be able to be presented in the 
way intended, so that they becomes more handy in everyday use. 

Gaute Sandvik
Received on Wednesday, 26 February 2003 06:56:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:19 GMT