Subject: Re: battlefields
From: Alan Karben <email@example.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 1996 10:19:01 +0500
From firstname.lastname@example.org Tue Jan 16 10: 22:17 1996
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.1.1
>Brian Behlendorf writes:
> > > You're right. With so many authors on the web, it's unlikely that one
> > > will ever find the definitive set of stylistic effects. But isn't it
> > > good to move the battlefield out of HTML?
> > Only if the new battlefield (style sheets) is friendlier to new weapons.
At 02:32 AM 1/16/96 +0100, Hakon Lie wrote:
>It is. The arms control HTML purists will not see their sematic tags
>abused or new ones introduced. The full force stylists will not have
>to declare their arsenal through DTD fragments that by default were
>rejected by the purists.
Not necessarily. Those publishers who mark up their content richer than they
are able to deliver it, if not given a powerful-enough style sheet
mechanism, will be inclined to manipulate *both* the (vendor-extended set
of) HTML tags and the associated style sheets.
Contrary to what has been said, content providers will deliver style sheets
in whatever formats are implemented in the popular browsers. Such style
sheets, however, might just wind up being derived from a combination of
richer authoring-side structural markup and a complex document
The Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition