Re: HTML: woes

Eugene Leitl (
Tue, 10 Mar 1998 23:00:49 +0300 (MSK)

On Tue, 10 Mar 1998, Michael Lorrey wrote:

> Its sad indeed to see neo-neo-luddites on an extropian mail list who think

Oh woe! 'gene's a closet neo-ludd.

> that '7-bit ascii should be enough for anybody'. I think that using HTML as

Obviously your spamfilter has been overzealous, removing the
<IRONy><megaBLINK></NUKE></IRONy> tags.

> an email standard is an excellent step up in the quality of communication.

Then _which_ HTML version, bitteschoen? The w3's consortiums'? N$'s?
M$'s? XML? SGML? XXLML? (I modestly submit mine). And which one will it
be next week? I suggest the one the Book of Kells has been written in.

> Here's words for warning to this reactionary attitude: "Why would anyone ever
> need more than 640k of RAM?", so sayeth Chairman Bill Gates, in 1981.

I stand corrected. And propose we all henceforth communicate solely in
blowfish-encyphered, Java-spiced VRML UNICODE Chinese ideograms. Only
PGP-signed gzipp'd byte-code compilates admitted, of course. This will
also nicely take care of the S/N ratio.

> As one of the most technophilic mail lists on the net, we should be
> encouraging the use of as high a quality communications medium as
> possible, to push the standards forward.

Yes. We should push it as far as the channels let us.