[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: "Braden N . McDaniel" <braden@endoframe.com>
- To: Ann Navarro <ann@webgeek.com>
- Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 18:49:16 -0400
On Sun, 29 Aug 1999 18:19:26 Ann Navarro wrote:
> At 06:11 PM 8/29/99 -0400, Braden N . McDaniel wrote:
>
> >Are you really contesting the popularly accepted notion that modern
> >browsers support a greater percentage of HTML 3.2 than of HTML 4.0?
>
>
> I'm stating that if you try hard enough, you can create something that will
> fail in about any language.
"Try hard enough" is a far cry from, "it's just as easy."
> In both HTML 3.2 and HTML 4.0, it is perfectly feasiable to design
> documents that work as intended.
Which isn't in any way suggestive of HTML 4.0's success, given that you can pretty much slap a HTML 4.0 Transitional doctype declaration on an HTML 3.2 document and have it work just as well.
> HTML 4.0 does not universally fail. You do
> not have to avoid substantial methods that are popularly available to make
> it not fail.
In measuring the success of the HTML 4.0 specification, "popularly available" can't reasonably be used as you've used it here. That success *hinges* on the constructs it specifies being made popularly available. If those constructs are not popularly available, then it detracts from the success of the specification.
--
Braden N. McDaniel
braden@endoframe.com
<URI:http://www.endoframe.com>
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|
