- From: MegaZone <megazone@livingston.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 02:17:15 -0700 (PDT)
- To: dxc@ast.cam.ac.uk (Dave Carter)
- Cc: schwarte@iwb.uni-stuttgart.de, www-html@w3.org
Once upon a time Dave Carter shaped the electrons to say... >documentation (mostly via latex2html). <FIG> is implemented in Lynx-FM. >these tags are very useful. We need to find a way to take html 3.0 <FIG> is lame - why would anyone want to cling to it when <OBJECT> supercedes it? Am I missing something here? >forward, and to convince people it is a better starting point than html You'd have a *lot* of convincing to do, having followed 3.0 for, or, the last 2 years or so - before it really was 3.0 at least, when it was 'cool stuff we'd like to do after 2.0' - I don't think it is superior to 3.2 *plus* the projects being worked in in the W3C. And <MATH> is one of those projects. Trying to work in solidifying 3.0 is stupid duplication of effort since most of the same feautres, of features that supercede them, are already being worked on for the next generation going forward from 3.2. -MZ -- Although I work for Livingston Enterprises Technical Support, I alone am responsible for everything contained herein. So don't waste my managers' time bitching to them if you don't like something I've said. Flame me. Phone: 800-458-9966 support@livingston.com <http://www.livingston.com/> FAX: 510-426-8951 6920 Koll Center Parkway #220, Pleasanton, CA 94566
Received on Friday, 10 May 1996 05:17:23 UTC