> You can see this now, in the way people are using graphics to embellish their
> documents. I am currently proposing an extension that would allow authors to
> customise a document toolbar in this way for this very reason. I believe that
> styles shouldn't be part of the document directly though. Instead it seems
> preferable to link the HTML document to stylesheets and to allow the
> opportunity for servers to send stylesheets appropriate to each class of
> browser. This makes for a much cleaner design, considering the very wide
> range of browser platforms.
I am not sure that separate style sheets vs. embedded style information
necessarily make for a cleaner design. The real design elegance is in
how you express the style both in terms of axis of control and syntax.
Either way, obviously from my mail, I think that some more control over
style is important to the future of the web.
> > * programmable and portable - document publishers have to know what is
> > widely supported and what is not. (the same phenomena as PC software
> HTML is already very good at this - browsers are available for a staggering
> number of platforms. HTML+ will soon follow suit. HTML+ will be more portable
> than HTML as you won't need to translate tables and math into inline images
In this case, the issue is not platforms (thanks to the efforts to date)
but validation. How can a publisher verify their information can reach
a wide audience without testing on each browser?
Not really...It is hard to know what html constructs are legal vs supported
on the particular browser you are using. Your "lint" concept for checking
a document would help a lot.
Dave Hollander Hewlett-Packard
Document Interchange Specialist 3404 East Harmony Road, MS. 1U11
Learning Products Services Fort Collins, Colorado 80525