Re: Strict DTD a new twist

At 11:06 PM 1/6/01 +0100, Gregor Pirnaver wrote:
>Note that sometimes you "just have to" burn bridges behind 
>you (people are not the only ones reading and writing on 
>the Internet).

Which opens up a whole new can of worms.

I think it pretty safe to speculate that in the near future, screens are
going to be getting smaller, many new "Internet devises" are going to be
hitting the main stream that actually bring "any time any where" Internet
access into the realms of reality.

Something has to give.

I have to admit, even as anal as I am about standards compliance, the
thought of seeing my work on a screen measuring 1.5X2 inches on the back of
a cell phone scares the hell out of me.

Yea, Yea. I read about the fancy new PROPRIETARY display languages. The
problem is . . . there isn't a bunch of different Internets, there is only
one. How are "we" going to keep the consumer using a PDA from trying to
view our "best viewed with 800X600 at 24 bit color" pages? How are we going
to keep Jeff and his 21" 19000X 36000 MAC Hi-Res monitor off our pages
designed for display in a two inch square?

Problem huh?

Obviously we are going to have to move to some type of "system" that will
detect the viewer agent and parse out a page specifically designed for that
agent dynamically.

>From what I have read, XML is moving us in that direction. My gut, and a
review of the language, tell me that is going to work . . . eventually.

In the interim we are in a real bind. I probably don't need to  tell any of
you that we are in a bad situation as developers as a matter of course.

In order to meet our (often implied) obligation we have to progress forward
(create a page that looks good in NN6.X) while not excluding the vast
majority of the planet that ~wishes~ they could upgrade to NN 3.X (but
can't because their MAC LCII's and 286's simply can not run it).

It is a tough situation even in its simplest form.

Say I'm doing a job for a public information document archive. I can
reasonably expect these documents to remain posted and the content
unmodified for YEARS.

What language do I use to present them? Do I bid the job based on the
inclusion of a FULL update and recoding in six months or . . . two years?

Even if I use HTML and write to version 2.0, the thought of a page
consisting of two or three hundred words being viewed on a screen measuring
1.5X2 inches is just plain unacceptable.

Conversely, Jeff is going to hate me for presenting 2 or three hundred
words in rectangular block format on his three city block sized MAC monitor
running NN 8.X.

Now. Mary comes along with her fancy new browser that will allow her to
customize the navigation buttons on my page. Heck, she can even change her
viewing window from rectangular to ROUND.

Gregor is absolutely correct and is being 110% reasonable in his conclusion. 

The problem is . . . 

Which bridges, and when do we set them afire?

What's a Web Geek to do?!?!?!?!
Fuzzy.
______________________________________________________________
Captain F.M. O'Lary
webmaster(at)canopy.net
Another year ends.
All targets met. All systems working. All customers satisfied.
All staff eagerly enthusiastic. All pigs fed and ready to fly.
------------------------------------------------------------------

HTML: hwg-basics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA