> Berna L. Massingill writes:
> > >> Joseph R. Kiniry writes:
> > >> > it's the web, and while adam thinks it is the end-all, i think
>it sucks. :)
> > >> I don't think it's the end-all. I just think it's better than
> > >> presently out there.
> > See, Joe, I told you he was smarter than that. (But Adam, in what
> > category is it "better than anything else"?)
> Distributed referral, semantic markup, and transport / exchange /
> dissemination of bits of information. It stands here and now in 1997 as
> the world's only truly working, global distributed object and document
> information exchange system.
yeah yeah yeah
> The Web is end-all only in the sense that the philosophy of the Web, for
> better or worse, was realistic enough to work on such a global scale.
> These principles include the decentralizing the trust management and
> information storage, using tags to say precisely what you mean, linking
> naming to ownership, and allowing the system to be robust enough that
> brittle local failures don't bring the global whole system down.
the web succeeded for a very simple basic reason. it came essentially "from
the streets" while there are the C|NET's of the world, there are a whole
lot more www. mywebsite.com. to put it simply as much as I hate to say it,
it was the total lack of good design that makes it attractive to the
unwashed masses. couple that with the basic information aspect and there
I remember my first commerical web site and I received more mail chastising
the site for being "slick" and "well designed" than complements. of course
that was 15 web years ago, (one RL year being = to 7.5 web years) but it
taught me alot about what people wanted.
Care about people's approval and you will be their prisoner.
-Toa Te Ching