- From: jptxs <jptxs@idt.net>
- Date: Wed, 10 Sep 1997 10:12:49 -0400
- To: Jordan Reiter <jreiter@mail.slc.edu>
- Cc: galactus@htmlhelp.com (Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet), www-html@w3.org
At 04:48 PM 9/9/97 -0500, Jordan Reiter wrote: >At 12:37 PM -0500 1997-09-09, Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet wrote: >>In article <3.0.3.32.19970909092716.0068cb50@smtp.idt.net>, >>jptxs <jptxs@idt.net> wrote: >>> not bowing to the reality of how this process is carried out is not >>> productive. >> >>The problem here is that "reality" mostly means "Whatever Netscape >>comes up with", as far as new HTML extensions are concerned. Given >>their history of strange extensions, that's not really a good way >>to work on a new standard. > >Oh, I don't know--I think Marc Andreessen and/or Netscape Inc. came up with >some pretty clever HTML ideas. You know, some obscure elements like:... >All browser makers are guilty of creating elements in order to further the >functionality or visuality of HTML. Netscape just happened to come up with I basically agree with the both of you in theory--extensions, at least 'clever', i.e. useful when/if implamented, has been Netscape's ball game. my point is that lamenting that here, in a discussion of standards, is counterproductive. no matter what the source of a proposed element or extension is, it should simply be considered as either useful or not, within the purposes of the language or not, and then either approved [by W3C, not us, of course :)] or not. Jordan brought up the example of <MULTICOL>. when this first came out, i could've given a rat's ass who proposed it--i was excited. alas it never came to be, but not because it came from Netscape--because it was not in the best interests of HTML to go down the layout path. oh, and Jordan, every ounce of irony is intended :) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ JPTXS mailto:jptxs@idt.net home: http://idt.net/~jptxs biz: http://www.middleroom.com -------------------------------------------- "...man's greatest labor so far has been to reach agreement about very many things and to submit to a *law of agreement*-- regardless of whether these things are true or false." -Nietzsche ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Received on Wednesday, 10 September 1997 10:13:08 UTC