home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Terry:
- > > + I am not sure that STRONG, B, I, and U are desirable as
- > > elements. These formatting characteristics ought to
- > > get applied to elements on the basis of their meaning.
- > > But that's a rather SGML point of view; you may wish
- > > to allow this slop room for WWW.
-
- Dave:
- > I don't like them either. They are present in HTML to support
- > importing (scanned) documents for which a filter has no way of
- deciding
- > the original meaning.
-
-
- HTML and HTML have a status in between a formatting language and a
- spacific application. As a delivery language for very wide
- use, the tags must be generic thimselves. STRONG emphasis
- or EMphasis is not a formatting instruction, it is semantic.
- But it is not as semantic as PROHIBITION or
- LOCSHELFNUMBER or MICASHEETTHICKNESS.
-
- HTML+ must like HTML refrain from falling into eiter trap,
- of being too related to markup, or of being too related
- to a specific application. FLYLEAF sounds very booklike
- to me. Perhaps we should ask ourselves what the logical
- significance (rather than paper representation) of a flyleaf
- is. Normally it is a summary, much like a WAIS source file's
- "description:". It is free, and provided by the publisher
- to entice the reader in. If we make it less booklike
- then we can use it for say databases and cyberspace
- manicure parlours as well as books. If you can can see how
- to describe something without the book analogy, then you will
- have something more flexible for the future. As who knows
- what ORA will be publishig in a few years' time? :-)
-
- Tim
-
-
-