HTML 4.0 Approved

[Thomas Dowling]

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew J. Mutch <amutch at tln.lib.mi.us>
To: Thomas Dowling <tdowling at ohiolink.edu>
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <web4lib at library.berkeley.edu>
Date: Friday, December 19, 1997 9:13 AM
Subject: Re: HTML 4.0 Approved


>
>My point is that the vast majority of people have neither the time or
>inclination to "learn" HTML version x.x.  As long as Composer, or Front
>Page, or whatever editor you use creates pages that "look good" in the
>browser that you use, many of the issues discussed here are irrelevent.
>Unless and until the Microsoft's here enough complaints from enough
>people, they are unlikely to change their ways.  While people who
>specialize in the area can have a greater impact, even as it has been
>discussed on this list, there is even disagreement among the "specialists"
>about the importance of writing "good code".


I agree.  There never should have been a need for people to mark up HTML by
hand unless they wanted to, but the most widely used editing tools have
intentionally and/or ignorantly fostered a Tag Soup markup environment.  My
particular concern is that the advantages to using HTML 4.0 (and before
long, XML) derive from structured markup, and if the editors and browsers
cannot or will not support that, the standard will likely end up in the
trash.  If the Web cannot find real standards around which to coalesce, it
will either fracture into multiple non-interoperable Webs, descend into
uninterestingness, or coalesce around the de facto standards set when the
Last Man Standing becomes a de facto monopoly (and I'm suspicious of all the
players, not just the one whose name leapt to your mind with the word
"monopoly"*).

Thomas Dowling




(*That would be Parker Brothers, of course.)