Re: What are the problems with IDML?

>You can already do this.  Lynx can e-mail back someone based
>on the link relationship "MADE"; WebTraveler, Lexicon, and
>others can understand "NEXT", "PREV", and so on.  I don't see
>why both Microsoft and Netscape have chosen to ignore outright
>such a useful feature.

Yes, and <link> is already useful for css. I wish NS and MS would implement
some of these very useful links.

I think authors are holding  back the acceptance of next and previous links.
Why? Because authors want to have a link (usually button) style in keeping
with their pages.

Unlike forward and back, next and previous makes navigation dependant on a
certain class of browsers. Browsers already have too much real estate
devoted to toolbars and these buttons would just add to that. Too many
navigation options might confuse the average person---they have to
understand forward and back as well as next and previous. Authors would have
to maintain two sets of links (one for link enabled browsers and one for
link aware browsers) also.

Personally, I would like to see next and previous on all browsers, for the
simple reason that one should be able to flip pages as easily on the web as
in a book. And I would not have to hunt around the page for buttons. It
would reduce traffic and maintenance of graphics.


   _/     Steve Knoblock 
   _/     City Gallery - History of Photography
   _/     Member:  National Stereoscopic Association