«Marc Andreessen (email@example.com)
Fri, 26 Feb 93 13:32:09 -0800
Tim Berners-Lee writes:
> I don't want to change HTML now if I can help it, until it has gone to RFC track
I absolutely agree in all cases -- my purpose in suggesting IMG is that things are reaching the point where some browsers are going to be implementing this feature somehow, even if it's not standard, just because it's the logical next step, and it would be great to have consistency from the beginning -- so that when HTML2 comes along, we're all still in lockstep.....
The HTML 5 designers/implementers fight has always been there, with implementers usually having the last word.
Mark Pilgrim on how much the WHATWG resembles the HTML 2 working group activity: http://web.archive.org/web/20110710091457/http://diveintomar...
Wait a minute -- let's temporarily forget about MIME, if it clouds the
issue. My objection was to the discussion of "how are we going to
support embedded images" rather than "how are we going to support
embedded objections in various media".
Otherwise, next week someone is going to suggest 'lets put in a new
tag <AUD SRC="file://foobar.com/foo/bar/blargh.snd">' for audio.
There shouldn't be much cost in going with something that generalizes.
> SGML does provide an official way of doing this folks
and even if Dan C ain't here to round us up we maybe
ought to stick to the track.
> <!ENTITY ICON6 SYSTEM "http://blah..>&ICON6;
Good proposal though, and hope that this takes off.
It apparently is ignored by most browsers now and no longer allowed in HTML5.
<img src=blah.png dpi=72/>
<img src=blah_hq.jpg dpi=300/>
<caption>The fabled Blah stalks it's prey.</caption>
<copyright year=1997>John Doe</copyright>
<license href="http://cc.org/sharealike">CC Sharealike</license>
Well, maybe not next week, but certainly 15+ years later.
Because I wanted to avoid overloading HREF -- doesn't really make sense in this context, I don't think.
So... that's the reason!
Best sort something out now, before people get used to things working in a certain way.
Fact check: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosaic_(web_browser)
> While often described as the first graphical web browser, Mosaic was preceded by WorldWideWeb and the lesser-known Erwise and ViolaWWW.
> This is required functionality for X Mosaic; we have this working, and we'll at least be using it internally.
@pmarca, why? If you don't mind : ) Just curious.
But I swear that back in 2007-2008 I remember him having blog posts about meeting Obama?
edit: found it at the archive
I guess it was just deleted over time as the blog.pmarca.com was made more professional.
"I was proposing to use the file extension (.xbm above) to tag what format the
image was in, but with the intention that in future, when HTTP2 comes along,
the same format negotiation technique would be used to access images."
Almost twenty years later and still no HTTP2!
Little did we know back then...
Why yes, I still remember that, why do you ask?
Why'd you have to go making things popular? I could still be using Lynx on a 1200 baud modem!
Nineteen years later and we still don't have HTTP2.
“HTTP2” is a reference to Basic HTTP as defined in 1992. At this point, in early 1993, it was still largely unimplemented. The draft known as “HTTP2” evolved and was eventually standardized as “HTTP 1.0” (albeit not for another three years). HTTP 1.0 did include request headers for content negotiation, a.k.a. “MIME, someday, maybe.”
So, at least in this context, yes, we do have "HTTP2".
Ha, so that's what rel was supposed to mean.
Am i glad I saw this.
HTML is already very verbose. Although 'header' and 'footer' appear (supposedly) once per page, styling inline elements requires to use 'strong' or the generic 'span' tag. And it's one situation when the tag is numerously repeated, which ends up in a very low signal/noise ratio.
My position may come from the fact that I type every line of code (I have no IDE, just Notepad++). But I think that there aren't enough HTML tags for us to have to use longer names in order to avoid confusion.
"I had imagined that figues would be reprented as
<a name=fig1 href="fghjkdfghj" REL="EMBED, PRESENT">Figure </a>"
That would have really changed how things evolved. Probably then anything that was specifying an external resource would have all been anchors.
"I somewhat prefer ICON since it implies that the IMAGE
should be smallish"