- From: Steinar Bang <steinarb@falch.no>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jan 1995 11:17:19 +0100
- To: Multiple recipients of list <www-html@www0.cern.ch>
>>>>> "C. Bailey" <bi3003@bristol.ac.uk> writes: > The recent spate of mailings about software which converts various > document formats into HTML makes one wonder whether trying desperately to > cram every last feature into the HTML specification will really provide > an adequate solution. It won't! And this has been clear to a lot of people for quite a while. But allowing every file format under the sun, isn't the solution either. You can do this today, btw. HTTP already use the MIME mechanism you are referring to, to label the file it transmits. All Web browsers I have used, have a mapping between mime types and external programs to handle files of that type. This mapping is much better than the extension based mapping you suggest. But even though you *can* use a lot of different file formats, the core of the Web, the actual Web itself, consists of interlinked HTML files. The only thing that keeps the Web together (apart from chewing gum, and hope) is a common file format, that a lot of clients, on a lot of different platforms, can handle. in some way or other. So what do you do? Well, the scalable solution is where you have a way to describe the data format/data structure of the file you are transmitting, and a way to tell the browser what to do with it. A pretty interesting suggestion for using SGML do describe the data format and style sheets to tell the browsers what to do is [1]. This is less esoteric than you might think. Many of the parts necessary for an implementation of this type exists already. It's more a question of gluing them together. - Steinar [1] http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/SDG/IT94/Proceedings/Autools/sperberg-mcqueen/sperberg.html
Received on Friday, 27 January 1995 02:22:26 UTC