W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > January to February 2001

Re: WWW: Interoperability Crisis?

From: Wilbur Streett <WStreett@mail.Monmouth.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 13:47:18 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: "John Hardy" <jh@lagado.com>, <www-talk@w3.org>
At 04:59 PM 1/22/01 +1100, John Hardy wrote:
>: I'm working on doing that right now.  I'm not going to engage in XML or
>: latest nonsense to do it.  I'll translate HTML on the fly into scripts for
>: the technology that I've created.  I'll offer translation services into
>: better implementations for those sites that people want to see that I
>: are worth it, and (gasp), I'll even charge for it on occasion.
>Well good for you, sounds great! Unfortunately, I couldn't download your
>plugin so i didn't see much of your site.

You must be the Mac guy that I saw on the logs..  sorry, it's less than 1/2
of one percent of the marketplace.

>Still, i'm sure glad we all have HTML (flaws and impurities) to fall back on
>rather than some quirky proprietory file format. It's why the web succeeded
>and why Microsoft MSN switched to HTML from its own godforsaken RTF based

But you did see the noplugin page and get an idea of what I'm doing.  Now
bread down and spend the few hundred dollars to have a PC available.

>The point is this stuff is simple. Its high level, not some information free
>low level display language. It could be made much better. More people now
>understand the benefits of things like stylesheets and the separation of
>form and content.

I refuse to engage in stylesheets.  They do not enhance my creation of a
page when I am creating it.  

>Its simple, minimally constraining technologies that succeed in the long
>run. That's because they loosely couple the ends of the communication
>channel. They don't break as easily as technology built for the short term.

The first usable technology is what suceeds in the long run.  The rest is a
bunch of updates that people think provide an advantage which end up not
being used by people.

>Finally, instead seeing it as a "burden" to support web accessibilty,
>properly designed, this stuff comes for free.

If The original person claiming that he had a solution to accesability for
the blind has a solution that comes from free with no burden, then indeed I
wouldn't mind.  But given the reality of the visual nature of the web, and
text, and everything else, it's not going to be a burdensome issue to
design web pages for people who are sightless.


        Putting A Human Face On Technology ;-)
        Literally!  http://www.TheFaceOf.com
Received on Monday, 22 January 2001 02:11:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:33:02 UTC