- From: Justin Wood (Callek) <116057@bacon.qcc.mass.edu>
- Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 20:34:33 -0400
- To: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>
- CC: www-html@w3.org
To begin, I agree with, and appreciate how verbose and articulate Al was on his comments. Citing only a portion of Al's comments below, when HTML was first introduced, few[er] people had use for the web, and once use started to spread, technologies for visual presentation (which helped attract the average user) began to emerge. The fact that the less containerized model began to appear, and appeal to [young?] web-authors and visitors to those website alike, was not only an additional allure to the technology world, but was also enhanced by the UA's which were (and continue to be) present in the world at that time. Now with more and more people having immense need and use for web-traversal, and technologies such as CSS, and XML continuing to be developed and support increasing, catering to the semantic/presentational separation is a requirement. I agree that <separator> has its use in "quickened page writing" and perhaps a doctype could be established to support this, but for the main purpose of the web as I see it, in its semantic nature, a grouping of what is to be separated is to be favored. Such that, the author of a page needs to determine "why" he needs a separator, and what it separates, rather than simply tossing one in, due to utterance. Though as I feel I have began to utter (and tangent) myself, I will end my addition to this thread. ~Justin Wood (online nickname: Callek) Al Gilman wrote: > > But in defence of the path HTML WG has taken, ISO HTML tried to > impose a fully containerized model and the world yawned. > > Al
Received on Wednesday, 25 May 2005 00:34:33 UTC