- From: Stephanos Piperoglou <spip@hol.gr>
- Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 22:19:54 +0200 (EET)
- To: Peter Flynn <pflynn@curia.ucc.ie>
- cc: ArnoudEngelfriet <galactus@htmlhelp.com>, www-html@www10.w3.org
On 31 Dec 1996, Peter Flynn wrote:
> I do really wish we could get away from this idea that 3.2 has some
> kind of validity as a "standard" for HTML. It's a kludge cooked up by
> the W3C as a stopgap until they can get some kind of agreement on
> something. Nothing wrong with using it, but to advocate it is really
> doing users a disservice. IMHO. YMMV. Any ideas?
IM-just-as-HO, that's reason enough to advocate it. If people stop using
FRAMEs and BANNERs and SPACERs and all of those dreaful little hacks until
someone gets a legit way to implement them in a right way then we will get
along a lot better.
BTW I'm not in favour myself of not using anything that's not out of the
W3C. The W3C moves *way* too slow, which is also correct, in my view, for
any maker of standards. In my ideal world, extensions to HTML *should* be
pioneered by others, but care should be taken that they are backwards
compatible and compliant to the general guidelines set out (SGML compliance
being one. I would really be happy if every new extension came with a DTD).
And most importantly, that they are created because of serious consideration
of users problems and not because someone thought they were spiffy.
On a side note, it's nice to see that SPACER and MULTICOL really died off
without anyone using them.
Add my name to that list of people wanting CLASS and ID in HTML 3.2 (there
IS one being made, ISN'T there? :-))
--
Stephanos Piperoglou aka Sneakabout - http://users.hol.gr/~spip/index.html
All I need in my life is a little love and a lot of money. In that order.
...oof porothika! (tm)
Received on Wednesday, 1 January 1997 15:20:56 UTC