|>b> For example, as far as I know, none of the "alternative" browsers
|>b> implement ANY of the provisions for interactive graphical input
|>b> specified by the standards -- a fundamental limitation. There are
|>b> at least 3 to choose from:
|>
|> 'Alternative' browsers? All browsers are alternative. I don't think
|>anyone came down from on high and dubbed anyone's browser as 'the end-all
|>and be-all official HTML browser'. If any browser should be deemed
|>official, I'd have to say it should be Dave Raggetts browser, as he has
|>written the standard and the only browser to completley implement it.
On the levels issue, the only levels I am interested in are :-
level0 HTML
level1 HTML+
level2 HTML+ MATHs
The Maths extensions are a lot of work to implement and the only browser to
implement them implements very little else. But they are absolutely essential
if we are ever going to publish papers on the web as anlternative to
paying sums to get journals to publish papers then buying back the finished
product, doing all the work en-route for free making huge profits for
various publishing houses (eg that of Bob `anyone for a swim' Maxwell).
So I can see that putting maths into another level would be a good idea.
What I would prefer though would be to have HTML-1.0 HTML-2.0 HTML-2.1.
whoever though up the + ? Adding +s to things is in my view like some tacky
hollywood production JAWS2 or whatever, except that version 13
of HTML will look silly HTML++++++++++++++++....... :-)
Before that happens I think that people will have to go to full SGML or
at least a configuration file which is what mine uses. SGML fans might like
to note that a DTD is useless for doing this :-(
-- Phillip M. Hallam-BakerNot Speaking for anyone else.