4 ms·
"HTML1.0 was a local optimum. Somewhere there is another, better optimum. The W3C appears to be willing to travel the Himalayas of suboptimal to find it." I do
by gambler 15y ago
"HTML1.0 was a local optimum. Somewhere there is another, better optimum. The W3C appears to be willing to travel the Himalayas of suboptimal to find it."
I don't think they're even going in the general direction of better optimum.
Here is what I think that optimum should include:
- Better document model (vs no document model at all, which seems to be where it's all headed right now).
- Separation of content, layout and styling. Yes, into three parts, rather than the two we have right now.
- Partial caching and user-side includes that aren't a blob of ugly, shortsighted hacks. Something that's works with the document model, not against it. It's absolutely ridiculous that I have to write custom code to prevent the browser from re-downloading (and the server from re-generating) page headers so on.
- Significant improvement of forms. New UI elements, support for pure-HTML put/delete requests, different format for sending data that has structure (vs only key-value pairs).
- einhverfr 15y agoGenerally agreed, but would suggest a slightly different set of concerns separated. instead of separation of content, layout, and styling, I would suggest a separation of data, structure, and styling. Data + structure gives you content, structure plus styling gives you layout. So in this idea you might have RDF as data, an HTML template as structure, and CSS as styling. The browser would generate the HTML from the template and the RDF, and the CSS would then be used to lay it out and style it.