Chapter 13 - HTML
13.4.2 Who is hurt by non-standard HTML?
"Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on a
Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web,
when you had very little chance of reading a document written on
another computer, another word processor, or another network."
[Tim Berners-Lee in Technology Review, July 1996]
Use of proprietary HTML coding that is hardware or software
specific can deprive seekers of information. The
ultimate test of who might be hurt is to determine who the
audience is. If the documents under consideration are personal
vanity pages, it might be appropriate to use non-standard HTML.
If the documents are intended for an Intranet in which the
software and hardware can be dictated and supplied, then
anything goes.
If the information is critical to the world it would be best to use the
simplest, most widely supported HTML.
Who is being left out?
Relying heavily on graphics and non-standard markup,
and not providing text/plain HTML alternatives
leaves out many users.
- Anyone using a plain DOS or UNIX connection that is text only
(there are lots of them about and there are bound to be more, as
old DOS machines are cheap and easily available and demand for access
to the information on the Web is only bound to go up).
- Users who access the Net via public libraries,
universities and other text-only vehicles.
- A user who is sight impaired may be using a text to speech or text
to braille mechanism to use the Web. In this case, it is *critical*
to use standard HTML or the conversion software will not work properly.
- Many users have old modems, old hardware, and old software
(America OnLine, Lynx). Even old versions of Netscape
cannot understand the new Netscape additions to HTML.
- Power-users with very fast connections still travel with graphics off. People
trying to get to information or make purchasing decisions may be in a hurry.
- Users with handheld devices, such as the Apple Newton, and small
machines such as laptops, are severely limited by
thoughtless markup. This is another Web access area that is only
going to grow.
Abigail's WWW dream is a powerful
story that illustrates the power of the Web as a resource that
must be accessible to everyone.
Daniel W. Connolly, editor of HTML 2.0, has this to say about non-
standard markup, and the role of the W3C: (Connolly, Problems with IDML)
"But disregarding the specs -- and this is assuming you would disregard
the specs, rather than negotiating in the appropriate forums to get
them changed. I know _you_ wouldn't do that :-), but for all the folks
out there considering it: it is destructive to the fabric of the Web
and the net in the following way:
"It breaks down trust. It breaks down that notion that the net and the
Web are built on public specs -- that it's a level playing field out
there, cuz anybody can go and read the specs and implement them.
"If the documents out there don't conform to the spec, then folks
can no longer just code to the specs and expect it to work. They
have to reverse engineer the behavior of the market leader(s)
de-jour.
"So please, everybody, stop asking "what would it break?" and start
asking "what is the design rationale behind the current spec, and is
there new evidence that suggests the spec should be changed?"
"Once you've got an argument that the spec should change, then we'll
all start to look real hard at compatibility and deployment issues."
"Some might say that this battle has already been lost -- that
coding to the specs is a losing proposition anyway. I maintain
that it is cost-effective in the long run, and I will continue
to choose to see the world that way for as long as I live, or
until I become a cynic like everybody else :-{"
Dan
In the next section, we will take a look at exactly what HTML tags are "safe," that is,
understandable by any browser that visits.
Copyright © 1996
Pris Sears, All Rights Reserved
Pris Sears
<sears@vt.edu>