- From: MegaZone <megazone@livingston.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 13:41:34 -0700 (PDT)
- To: www-html@w3.org
Once upon a time Dave Raggett shaped the electrons to say... >> So does this mean that JUSTIFY will not be in HTML 3.2? >Correct - since this was not widely supported (and still isn't) >as of early `96. Fine - so 3.2 is descriptive. Lets lock it down and move on then. So, how about ALIGN=JUSTIFY in 3.3? Of has the W3C decided to wait to see what happens and just keep issuing descriptive DTDs? It wouldn't seem that way from the work on <OBJECT> and Style Sheets, but we need some support for features that are legitimate. Having ALIGN=JUSTIFY will not break existing browsers, there is no reason to avoid this. Same with ID, CLASS, and MD. Also SRC for HR, UL, OL, and LI. I consider thebit about avoiding them because of a need for size and space atrributes and smoke screen - you don't need them as long as the implimentation is clear that the image is displayed as is, just like IMG SRC before 3.2. Or you just add them to the tag too - older browsers will ignore them anyway. So, can we open serious discussion on the next DTD since it seems there is little room for enhancement on the 3.2 DTD? >> So just because neither Netscape nor Microsoft got around to implementing >> JUSTIFY we don't get it? Somehow this doesn't strike me as very desirable. >We will only get browsers with support for text justification if people >are prepared to put in considerable effort and expense into developing So? There are more than 2 or 3 browsers out there. If you put it in the DTD, *someone* will implement it. And if it gets popular, than the big browsers will too. And if no one does, well, still doesn't break anything. >and widely deploying browsers with this feature. To get high quality >results this would have to be combined with hyphenation. I expect that Hyphenation can come later as an improvement, no need to build in all the bells and whistles in the first run. >this will come eventually, but it is certainly not viewed as the highest >priority for vendors I have spoken with at this point. Fine - but if we put in in a DTD (3.2 or 3.3, or whatever) then people can use it, and it will cause vendors to implement it if they want to claim "HTML 3.3 Support" etc -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 Thursday, 16 May 1996 16:41:57 UTC