- From: Marc Salomon <marc@matahari.ckm.ucsf.edu>
- Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 11:35:56 -0800
- To: www-html@w3.org
MegaZone <megazone@livingston.com>: |I'm saying lets change what 'valid HTML' means, *if* that would provide |increased functionality on the web. Functionality on the web does not exist along a single axis in a single dimension. Decisions made to facilitate rendering on a GUI client can take their toll when it comes time for other user agents that have no interest in rendering an object on the screen want to proces a same document. Let's note the difference between browser and user agent. Data repurposing is the biggest win of SGML. Most content created on the web today (particularly using the HTML distensions de-jour) will be obsolete in 3-6 months in any case, so there needs to be a system that can include both non-parsing ephemeral fluff as well as high-value added persistent, reusable information. One of the first requirements for a WWW browser from the early CERN documentation was that they be forgiving when rendering imperfect documents. Great care has been taken to craft a valid ISO-8879 DTD for HTML. Aany applications are available that depend on the SGMLness of HTML. There is a middle way where the SGML purists can accept mixing structure and presentation in a document in an SGML compliant manner, avoiding the proliferation of special tags and attributes describing style. But to trash SGML for the convenience of GUI user agents trashes years of hard work creating the first large-scale, open digital information interchange infrastructure. On the insert question, it is now possible to create nonconforming composite documents in several ways, from vi up to an expensive authoring tool to various server-side techniques and even >gasp< SGML entities. Authors need to take some responsibility for ensuring that the documents they cook up are valid if they want their information to be reusable--this cannot be mandated or coerced. Most information on the web has no need to be crafted for reusability. But the fact that some content providers don't need this functionality is not a valid argument for constricting the functionality of HTML and its successors for those of us who do. An otherwise conforming HTML document with INSERT tags is still a conforming SGML document. I would argue that running that conforming document through a preprocessor that understands how to resolve the HTML <INSERT> tag, and then piping the resulting compound document into an ISO-8879 parser to check for conformance breaks SGML. All I'm saying is let's not wear blinders when it comes to the wins of SGML. -marc -- --/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ // Marc Salomon - Software Engineer - Innovative Software Systems Group \\ \\ Library and Center for Knowledge Management - UC, San Francisco // // phone : 415.476.9541 - e-mail : marc@ckm.ucsf.edu - fax: 415.476.4653 \\ \\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\<URL:http://www.ckm.ucsf.edu/marc/>/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\///
Received on Thursday, 21 March 1996 14:36:35 UTC