🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mon, 13 Jan 1997 19:56:25 GMT, Dirk.Jumpertz@ping.be (Dirk
Jumpertz) wrote:

[Newsgroups trimmed slightly.]

>You can only be COMPETITIVE by being INNOVATIVE! And being INNOVATIVE
>means new features. And quite honnestly, Microsoft and Netscape are a
>billion times more innovative than the W3C.

Have you ever looked at some of the innovations proposed by the W3C?
No?  Then how can you make such a statement?

Take a look at things like HTML 3.0 (dead because Netscape and
Microsoft preferred their own "innovation") and you'll see what
innovation truly is.  Don't forget about Cascading Style Sheets, which
have been around for years, but are only now gaining attention at
"innovative" companies like Microsoft and Netscape.  And what about
PNG?  With all of its advantages over GIF and its promotion by the
W3C, it still is not supported by Microsoft or Netscape.  Where's the
innovation?

>>  Have you read the HTML 3.2 proposition ?
>
>I skipped on 3.0 to be honest :(

Then how can you make comments about a lack of innovation at the W3C?
Do your homework.

>Quite honestly, the entire paragraph formatting tags have always been
>a real screw up. It all started with the wrong implementation of the
><p> tag. It should have been <p> </p> and later on extended with <p
>aling=left|right|center|justified> </p>. Now we can use 3 different
>tags <p>; <p align=...> </p> or <div align=...> </div>... oops and of
>course <center> </center>... so who's to blame???

Who invented <CENTER> when <P ALIGN=center> made perfect sense?

By the way, HTML 3.0 defined--years
ago--ALIGN=left|right|center|justify for paragraphs, headings,
divisions, and tables.  It seems your "innovative" heroes at Netscape
and Microsoft couldn't handle ALIGN=justify at all, and the simplistic
ALIGN=center for tables was beyond them as well.

BTW, there is a difference between <P> and <DIV>.  Do some reading at
the W3C instead of at Netscape and you'll see what I mean.

>Personally I never understood how they could make it so damned
>strange???

Yes, <CENTER>'s introduction confused things somewhat, but, as you
pointed out, so many people using it forced the W3C to define it
(since no one else had).

>No seriously... but because there are no commercial interest behind
>the W3C the development and innovation process is incredibly slow

This isn't accurate at all, as I've pointed out above.  One could say
that *standardization* at the W3C is slow, but this is natural and, in
fact, necessary to ensure that a standard is completely accurate.

>(it
>reminds me a bit of the economy in the former USSR: no competition ->
>no innovation, no progress)

You might think that without competition the W3C would lack
innovation, but, in practice, that hasn't proven to be the case.
Perhaps it's because the individuals at the W3C don't innovate because
it's their jobs, but because they love the Web--many of the Web's
pioneers are at the W3C.

>Since HTML 2.0 I have the impression that the W3C is drifting apart
>from the Real World...

Can you explain this?

Liam Quinn
===============  http://www.htmlhelp.com/%7Eliam/  ===============
Web Design Group            Enhanced Designs, Web Site Development
http://www.htmlhelp.com/    http://enhanced-designs.com/