Re: A proposal for addition to HTML 3.0: Frames

On Tue, 19 Sep 1995, Marc Salomon wrote:

> Makes you wonder what they're thinking down in Mtn. View:
> 
> 1.  Alleged adherence to standards process is only for marketing purposes.
> 2.  Send marketing guy to standards process with oblique reference to 
>     published fait accompli.

I say give Netscape a break... I guess no one here remembers, but just 
about a month ago, Lou Mountulli (a Netscape person) sent an email [1] to 
this mailing list, in which he described what Netscape now calls 
"frames", and asked (I quote):

> My question to this group is what would be the best
> syntactical way to add this expressive power to HTML?

The group's response, to quote Brian Behlendorf [2], was to advise
"Netscape (and others working on this)... to find an acceptible
'aggregation' language. Something that simply described the individual
parts and their relations on each other."  Brian even suggests "make it a
pseudo-HTML language using whatever HTML tags you had in mind for this
proposal". 

Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't this exactly what Netscape has 
done? I guess we all have some rather short memories... Or have we 
decided that just because something's been implemented, it's wrong?

[1] http://www.acl.lanl.gov/HTML_WG/html-wg-95q3.messages/0771.html
[2] http://www.acl.lanl.gov/HTML_WG/html-wg-95q3.messages/0786.html

--/ Alexei Kosut <akosut@nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us> /--------/ Lefler on IRC
----------------------------/ <http://www.nueva.pvt.k12.ca.us/~akosut/>
The viewpoints expressed above are entirely false, and in no way
represent Alexei Kosut nor any other person or entity. /--------------