3 ms·
You can chart a history of the Web by what you could reasonably do cross-browser. In the beginning, it was formatted text. That was it. You had bold, underline
by cbd1984 12y ago
You can chart a history of the Web by what you could reasonably do cross-browser.
In the beginning, it was formatted text. That was it. You had bold, underline, italic, and maybe even justification, but images relied on separate helper programs and weren't displayed inline, but in their own windows. And that was assuming the web page and your system had at least one image format in common. (XBM? TIFF? Remember those? I'm not saying they're no longer used, but when was the last time you saw them on the Web?)
By the Here Comes Everybody stage, we'd pretty well gotten inline images and even background images sorted, to the limits of color space (256 color is... better than CGA?) and the few format problems left, but fonts certainly didn't transfer and the only music format which was even remotely feasible was MIDI, which is less an audio format and more like sheet music, in that it has to be played by software instruments on your own system. Interesting concept, but no guarantee of sound quality at the receiving end.
Skipping a bit, we now have inline images sorted out, fonts sorted out, a workable CSS standard pretty well universal, and even video mostly working, despite the political and legal complications.
Now we're annoyed that we can't use our browsers to play games that were written for computers still in use in the Web's early days. 'Progress' is getting annoyed about increasingly interesting and exciting things, it seems.
- fenomas 12y agoTrue, and it's worth noting that it was only midway through this process that people started expecting different browsers to render pages identically. In the early days HTML merely structured the information; styling was assumed to be left up to user preference.