Article View: be.comp.internet
Article #58471Re: Re- Bad HTML / frame usage
From: Thomas Weigle
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 00:00
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 00:00
93 lines
5379 bytes
5379 bytes
In article <8056.6967T51T676@ping.be>, Philippe Duchenne <Philippe.Duchenne@ping.be> wrote: > Yes, but it left LESS people behind. Innovations leave people behind, simply because people rarely have the insight to understand that something is innovative. As for leaving people behind, it would be fairly easy to provide a plug-in for Netscape and IE that lets blind people use it, and these apps will offer good options to turn stuff off in the future (IE already does). There. All the disabled taken care off. Now, if we could only get the fanatics to switch as well ... > We can discuss about standard for long... <snip watch production> Yeah, but it took humanity something like 5000 years to agree on the standard of a 24 hour day. What makes you so sure that what the W3C offers today is more of a standard than what the majority of the users actually USE. > > are not fortunate enough to be part of a minority. It applies to modern > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > ??? Are you joking ? Nope, I am hinting at the fact that "organized" minorities often enjoy more consideration as to their preferences and needs than do "the rest", simply because they are a minority. > I understand that most of the time, when I can't read a Web page, it's > due to the webmaster's poor HTML usage, not my browser's limitation. > Iam not just saying Netscape is crap, or this site is shit; I also > try to give my humble help to Web sites creators. Well, this discussion wasn't really about HTML usage, but rather why people will continue to use Netscape's and Microsoft's extensions and why W3C are better off if they manage to implement features that people like quickly. From the beginning of this thread, I have stated that my opinion is that everyone should be able to view the pages, and that it's better to create multiple web sites if you can't possibly make one work in more browsers than just Browser X Version Y. Unfortunately, it has been impossible to even start a discussion on the topic of why *people actually do use* Netscape et al to a greater extent than they use Lynx, since so many participants are rabid and fanatical in their opinions. > Someone else come and say: "Hey, why don't you use PNG ? It's free and > platform independant." > We start to produce the browsers we want... > > What will be for you the most acceptable standard for pictures on the > Web (STOP ! Have a breath... Think... Now go answer): > > - the one imposed by the most spread of our two browsers ? > - PNG format ? > I get the picture now. If you travel to India, you just want to see > the Taj Mahal. And when back, you just say "India is beautifull !". No, but there is so much more than information to this, and where my choice of browser unfortunately won't let everyone view all pages, your choice may well hinder a rapid development of an unfinished media into something so much greater than just a haven for scholars and computer geeks. <snip> Good points. Unfortunately, most people will not even consider this. As for browsers, I do not say that Netscape or IE is the best browser or even that what Netscape and Microsoft are doing is the right thing, but considering the circumstances, I wouldn't even dream of using a lesser browser. In terms of media, less is not always more, at least not in terms of presentation. If you feel the need to reply, please do so in email. I will be happy to continue this discussion, but won't have the time to follow a newsgroup that is flooded every day (and a newsgroup that doesn't provide me with much useful information I might add). //thomas +-------------------------------------------------------+ | Web designer, site coordinator at Icon Media Lab | | Work: weigle@iconmedialab.se - www.iconmedialab.se | | Home: weigle@algonet.se - www.algonet.se/~weigle | | Opinions expressed are mine, not my employer's. | +-------------------------------------------------------+ | "Would you give a guy a foot massage?" - Vincent Vega | +-------------------------------------------------------+
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<weigle-ya023180000302972224570001@news.algonet.se>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<weigle-ya023180002001972352440001@news.algonet.se> <5c1s1h$5do@cc.tut.fi> <weigle-ya023180002201970104060001@news.algonet.se> <6381.6963T1354T1786@ping.be> <weigle-ya023180002701970207350001@news.algonet.se> <8056.6967T51T676@ping.be>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f4ad3,51d22fd499362dbc X-Google-Attributes: gidf4ad3,public X-Google-Thread: fe74c,51d22fd499362dbc X-Google-Attributes: gidfe74c,public X-Google-Thread: fefc7,51d22fd499362dbc X-Google-Attributes: gidfefc7,public X-Google-Thread: 128453,51d22fd499362dbc X-Google-Attributes: gid128453,public X-Google-Thread: f4e7e,a539cc9d3e01ae85 X-Google-Attributes: gidf4e7e,public From: weigle@snip-to-mail.algonet.se (Thomas Weigle) Subject: Re: Re- Bad HTML / frame usage Date: 1997/02/03 Message-ID: <weigle-ya023180000302972224570001@news.algonet.se> X-Deja-AN: 214208303 references: <weigle-ya023180002001972352440001@news.algonet.se> <5c1s1h$5do@cc.tut.fi> <weigle-ya023180002201970104060001@news.algonet.se> <6381.6963T1354T1786@ping.be> <weigle-ya023180002701970207350001@news.algonet.se> <8056.6967T51T676@ping.be> content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 organization: waste mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: be.comp.internet,ping.html,comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html,comp.infosystems.www.misc,comp.sys.amiga.datacomm nntp-posting-user: b7946fa289d92798b93c87732e2a5b740