On 2016-10-06 03:45, Jacob Villarreal wrote:
> Hi,Thanks for responding. I don't think you have the right picture
I'm pretty sure I don't have the right picture (or at least your picture).
> I was actually proposing a new markup language referred to as
content markup language. The hypertext part of it isn't that important.
CML would has the linking capability, it's really nothing. The batch
infrastructure I was talking about is as simple as text batch files
containing the source path information of multiple object source files,
such as bitmaps, jpegs, text files, apps, etc... I think all that is
required by the HTML team is to create a batch file for every appliance
that is needed with respect to the two tags, multiple type attributes,
and subattributes, and the line sequencing shouldn't be too much of a
"all that is required", I think the emphasis here is on "all" as it
sounds like a full rewrite.
> I think this solution would completely phase out HTML all together,
> You shouldn't be so concerned about all the technical html bullshit,
there are no headers, and footers, only page coordinates, and source files.
You obviously have a dislike for HTML for some reason.
> I just thought a high def bitmap solution might work well for field
objects. Basically, taking a bitmap object, and applying a border, text
space, etc.., for use as the actual graphical object for the input field
This sounds like a graphical background template of some sorts.
Have you actually looked at what you can do these days with CSS3?
> So I thought the html team might just set it up to work that way. I
think it's a worthwhile option in the www world. Like I said, I don't
have much experience doing html
Apparently you have some programming or database experience, but with
the things you are suggesting it's far more "just add a few things" to
the existing browsers.
What you are talking about would require a new browser engine. Usability
(those who are blind or have weak sight) would go out the window. The
overhead would be immense with everything as bitmaps. (text compresses
extremely well by comparison). Responsive web design would no longer work.
I suspect what you want already exists but you are unable to see/find
the way to do it. I'm pretty sure the tools required to do what you want
It sounds like you are trying to invent include files of some sorts
(similar to .h in C).
Also your focus on bitmaps and coordinates, you do know that CSS allow
you to define fixed X and Y positions?
> structuring the mapping with one folder with all of it's objects,
per every page on the site. So the objects, whether they be text, or
image objects are called up from the root of the page for the most part.
As far as I know, the header attributes are used on text for font, and
size, etc.. CML would use the same attribute function on text anyway,
but you have the option of using text images as content as well.
I don't think yo have any idea of what HTML is/does.
HTML handles the structural and semantic part of a web page, CSS the
> it's just a more innovative URL solution than html. Personally, I
think html is kind of boring in comparison
How innovative this is (I find it just confusing myself) is
questionable, and your statement about HTML being boring is, well I
doubt that any language be it markup up scripting or programming is
anything but boring. They tried to make programming fun once and the
result was Point'n'Click programming, that never really took off.
> ...real-time data from ticker data being sent to the form, and store
it in real-time in the ticker_data.rec destination record as text by
line sequentially. The data can then be accessed in runtime
sequentially ... real-time output to a web app.
This would make local (file://) apps impossible, you seem to describe a
system that fetched data in real time from a database server.
If this was a stockmarket monitor or sports monitor or airport monitor
on a wall then I might understand what you are trying to do but even
efficient (and if using Websocket any latency is basically gone, only
limited by LAN latency).
> I'm trying to get some information on how to implement some new
tags/attributes on the backend.
This is far more than just "adding some new tags", you want to add tags
> correction on the code above
I can't help but feel that your "code" is little more than a variant of
a link tag.
I'm not trying to be mean or anything, I just can't see what you are
Roger Hågensen, Freelancer, http://skuldwyrm.no/