- From: unknown unknown <shadownymph@hotmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 06:44:03 PDT
- To: snowhare@netimages.com, Albertfine@aol.com
- Cc: www-html@w3.org, crism@ora.com
Please remove me from this list. Date: Mon, 1 Sep 1997 10:47:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Benjamin Franz <snowhare@netimages.com> To: Albertfine@aol.com cc: www-html@w3.org, crism@ora.com Subject: Re: HTML Streaming On Mon, 1 Sep 1997 Albertfine@aol.com wrote: > <html> > <head> > <event p=200 table=75,25> > </head> > <body> > <p> > Imagine 200 character and spaces here > </p> > <table> > Imagine a table that is 75 by 25 > </table> > </body> > </html> > > The browser would first display a pre rendered page for a paragraph with 200 > character and spaces and then a table that is 75 by 25. The browser would > then stream the character of the paragraph and cells of the table. Currently, > the entire paragraph would have to be downloaded first. Then the entire > table before it could be displayed. Ok. It is *VERY* clear at this point that you have somehow gotten the idea that everyone in the world uses mono-spaced fonts to render HTML normally (ie that 'i' takes the same room as 'W' on everyones' screens). You may have gotten this misconception from a browser that you use that is configured to use mono-spaced fonts for everything such as Lynx on a text oriented terminal. It doesn't really matter where you got it from. What is important is that this fundamental assumption is _completely and utterly wrong_. No more than 1 or 2 percent of browsers render in mono-spaced fonts normally (I'm going to ignore the issue of the CJK people for this - the point is still valid when you consider the mixing of CJK with non-CJK text). ON YOUR SCREEN: WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW is the same length as .......................................................... ON MY SCREEN WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW may be the same length as .................... or .............................................. or ................................................................... ................................................................... ................................................................... ................................................................... But is is highly probable that it *WILL NOT* be: .......................................................... This means that saying a paragraph is '200 characters' tells me *NOTHING* about how much screen territory it will take. It could consist of nothing but '.' characters and fit into *one* line. It could consist of 'W' characters and take 4 lines. It could have variable font metrics created by stylesheet considerations. It could have usage of FONT that makes it vary from even the font face initially declared *with no way to know in advance until the FONT tag is parsed*. There could be embeded objects with their own completely unrelated metrics. You could have a single string with no whitespace that cannot be easily broken into multiple lines. You may have every single character seperated by white space allowing line breaking nearly anywhere. You can't know *before the content comes down* whether some, all or none of these problems apply to the text in question. The author in particular has no way to know these in advance. Attempts to improve layout time by providing hints of how many characters are in the text are completely futile in nearly all cases. -- Benjamin Franz Hmmm...A thought just occured to me: The general problem of predicting web page layout with HTML in advance is probably iso-morphic to the Turing Stopping Problem. You can't know in general what it is going to do without actually doing it. ;-) ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 1997 09:46:13 UTC