- From: Dave Carter <dxc@ast.cam.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 12:50:13 +0100 (BST)
- To: MegaZone <megazone@livingston.com>
- cc: www-html@w3.org
On Wed, 10 Sep 1997, MegaZone wrote: > Once upon a time Dave Carter shaped the electrons to say... > >The mess whereby HTML has gone down in terms of functionality with every > >release subsequent to 3.0. > > I*Y*HO. > > I completely disagree. Personally I think the 3.0 proposal was bloated > with more worthless crap that 3.2 or 4.0. There were a few useful items > I miss - like BANNER - but few. I don't think the MATH support in 3.0 > was well thought out either and I'm glad it was dropped. If the claims > of portability and the ability to convey real contextual data - to allow > for importing/exporting from mathematics software - hold true, I am more > than happy to wait for it. > > A purely presentational system is little better than incluing gifs. IMHO. Well I am afraid I do not agree with you at all. Mathematical symbols and equations are as much part of technical documentation as words, and you do not hold back from presenting words because there isn't the facility to import/export to some package capable of analysing semantics. I do not understand what you find of value in 4.0 that wasn't in 2.0. Certainly not frames and scripting I hope. I find these of no value at all. They do not help in the clear and precise presentation of information. Which is what the WWW is all about. Dave Carter
Received on Wednesday, 10 September 1997 07:50:21 UTC