- From: Tyler Keating <tylerkeating@mac.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 15:18:41 -0600
On 16-Apr-07, at 3:03 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > > On Apr 16, 2007, at 1:39 PM, Tyler Keating wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I'm bringing this up again with a different tact, because the more >> that I think about it, the more I believe it has the ability to >> significantly change the perception and application of HTML and I >> would really like to keep the discussion alive. In the previous >> thread, I proposed a standard for archiving web sites into a >> single ZIP archive with a unique file extension and although it >> didn't get any outright negative feedback, it didn't drum up too >> much excitement either. If you can bear with me, I'd like to >> describe the idea again in a slightly different light. > > A cross-browser web archive format sounds like a useful thing. > However, I don't think it should be part of or even tied to the > HTML spec. In principle, such an archive could contain any browser- > viewable content as the root document. This could be HTML, XHTML, > SVG, generic XML, plain text, a raster image, or any number of > other things. So such an archive format is logically a separate > layer and should be specced as such. Okay. I understand it now... Thank you, you are right. Before I get out of here, whom do I bring this to instead? I'm guessing it needs to be the W3C Web Application Formats WG, but I'd like validation before I start bugging them (if that's even possible). Thanks, - Tyler
Received on Monday, 16 April 2007 14:18:41 UTC