Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Incidentally, I'm surprised that more people here haven't jumped in
on the discussion.
...been busy cracking some more bugs related to the visual - as usual.
Are all other web standards folks on here really in agreement that
(X)HTML is a visual language by design, or at least has a strong bias
towards the visual?
No, (x)html is basically a media-neutral language, but most of the users
are pretty biased towards a visual experience on the web - no matter the
language. That affects the way we _use_ the languages available to us,
just as in all other walks of life.
I think the problem is that CSS is lagging behind, and software
(browsers and such) are even further behind. Thus we can go on
discussing what should be the proper use of (x)html as a media-neutral
language, but there are in many cases few or no options but to use (or
misuse) (x)html for visual presentation first, and worry about the
neutrality and accessibility later.
The fact that I often prefer to turn off CSS, scripting and images, and
evaluate what I find on the web as pure (x)html-delivered content in the
form of text, makes proper use of (x)html really interesting. As I've
also started to use 'speaking' software to ensure (somewhat) that
content-delivery makes sense, makes proper and well-structured use of
(x)html even more important. Still, the use of (x)html has to be tilted
slightly towards the visual, simply because the visual is so important
to so many users, and the whole package of (x)html and supporting
languages and UA-support is so weak.
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
