It's time to move on from HTML

[Kevin Bennett]

I disagree with "Coded into a Corner" by Glenn Davis. For "authors" that
need to deliver just static pages sure, HTML cuts the mustard, but for any
kind of development work it stinks.

In all honesty, I don't want the same old html level 3.2 functionality (or
lack thereof). I want the ability to deploy fully fledged GUI applications
with all of the interactivity tools available to me in a Windows environment.
For example I would really like to be able to give my users something as
basic as an editable grid, without deploying half of NT to the client.

I'm aggravated by of all those web sites that erase my input when I don't
enter my telephone number in the "right" format and I'm too busy to use "shopping
carts". These are adequate (barely) if I'm buying one item, but when I want
to buy 50 grocery items, forget it - It's quicker to go to the store.

If Microsoft can deliver a mechanism for creating highly interactive Internet/Intranet
GUIs then I'll be dancing in the aisles.

Microsoft: Deliver drag-and-drop ease of use in a document-centric UI and
the Internet is yours! The **** with HTML 3.2

Regards

Kevin Bennett
MCSD

Please reply to: KBennett@CathedralSoftware.com

[Glenn Davis]

"Kevin Bennett" <KBennett@CathedralSoftware.com> wrote:
>
>
>I disagree with "Coded into a Corner" by Glenn Davis. For "authors" that
>need to deliver just static pages sure, HTML cuts the mustard, but for any
>kind of development work it stinks.

You must have read a different article from the one I wrote. I don't recall
saying anything about sticking with HTML.

>In all honesty, I don't want the same old html level 3.2 functionality (or
>lack thereof).

Neither do I. So why is MS sticking with HTML 3.2?


>I want the ability to deploy fully fledged GUI applications
>with all of the interactivity tools available to me in a Windows environment.

I want the ability to deply fully fledged GUI applications with full interactivity.
But I want my applications to work in ANY environment. That's what standards
support offers.


>For example I would really like to be able to give my users something as
>basic as an editable grid, without deploying half of NT to the client.

With standards based webbrowsers that's quite possible. And it won't matter
how the users is getting to it. They won't need a particular OS.

>If Microsoft can deliver a mechanism for creating highly interactive Internet/Intranet
>GUIs then I'll be dancing in the aisles.

If Microsoft can deliver a mechanism for creating highly interactive, standards
based GUI's, then I'll be dancing in the aisles.

>Microsoft: Deliver drag-and-drop ease of use in a document-centric UI and
>the Internet is yours!

Microsoft: Deliver drag-and-drop ease of use in a document centric, standards
based UI and the internet is yours!


>The **** with HTML 3.2

So Microsoft, why are you sticking with HTML 3.2?


Glenn