[REBOL] 1995 HTML (was Forum Name)
From: SunandaDH::aol::com at: 5-Jan-2004 18:53
Jason:
> > http://evaluation.express.rebol.net/projects/view1.3/
>
> ah thanks :-)
>
> It's a start, but yes that yikes 1995 HTML really needs to be modernized
> asap with semantic tags throughout as all the blogging tools do. Plus
> regular <meta> tags and other aids.
>
> In fact with even a *minimal* tweak, an embedded rebol code block version
> the page could be made accessible so open, external services could build a
> variety of Rebol and/or XML-friendly AltME archiving/search applications.
I don't want to defend the quality of Carl's HTML in this case -- I suspect
that what you see is the result of about an hour's work to publish the world
for the non-World users who want to follow the beta test as it develops. Not
what he might have done if he had had the time.
And I reckon that many of us could, with a day or so to spare write a very
useful Altme-to-html publisher that would provide all sorts of goodies.
But I will take a paragraph to explain Carl's approach to HTML.
I've emailed him about it in the past (I think I called his HTML "quaint").
He responded with his experience of keeping HTML basic so that it will work
across an enormous wide range of platforms and browsers -- Amigas, BEOS, you name
it. A much wider spread than the IE 5.0 vs Opera 7.xx spread that usually
informs cross-platform compatibility discussions.
Me, I take an opposite approach (feel free to kick holes in my HTML by taking
a peek at www.rebol.org) -- I aim at validation to HTML 4.01 Strict, and I
want an (almost) clean sheet from accessibility checkers like Cynthia Says:
http://www.contentquality.com/
There are limitations in both of our approaches, but at least we both have
some solid reasoning behind our strategies.
The REBOL world is a small but highly diverse community, so I guess other
website owners have hit various cross-platform compatibility issues. I'd be
interested in hearing others' approaches.
Sunanda<
