Subject:
|
Re: markup syntax for member pages
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 3 Jul 1999 19:36:25 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
452 times
|
| |
|
|
On Thu, 1 Jul 1999 18:10:00 GMT, "Todd Lehman" <lehman@javanet.com> wrote:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> > [...]
> > Well, it's not really geared toward spiffiness. Boldface and italics and
> > headers are functional tools to help convey semantic meaning in the text.
> > So it's actually geared toward non-spiffiness, or, rather, simply toward
> > nurturing the efficient expression and exchange of useful information. And
> > raw HTML is just a drag (as in slowing) in that regard. Fortunately, there
> > are places like geocities where people can put up a full-HTML page if they
> > want glitz and spiffiness.
>
> heh heh, well, I guess geocities is out of the picture now, given the bad
> press they're getting:
>
> http://www.sitepowerup.com/boycottyahoo/boycottyahoo.htm
Nah. Once Yahoo! adjusts their legal verbiage to match their intentions,
they'll be OK. I see they've taken another step closer to this (the first
step was to explicit state that they don't own the content, but that was
actually a non-step). Now, they only claim a license to do whatever they
want with the content posted to GeoCities until the homesteader quits.
That still needs more work, but it's getting there. Once they restate the
agreement to give them license do whatever they want with the posted
content, in order to serve it up on the web, or use for promotional of
GeoCities and Yahoo!, they'll have it right.
> Anyway, this whole recent Yahoo!/GeoCities stink yet another reason not to
> do full HTML hosting here. Not out of fear, but out of wisdom. The more
> fancy and creative that things can get, the more animosity is likely to brew
> when the terms of service require an irrevokable royalty-free (non-exclusive
> license) license of republishing rights, etc.
Right. And the less cohesive the whole site would be.
> For example, no one typically worries about there ever someday being the
> possibility of comprehensive newsgroup compilations distributed on CD-ROM,
> but go to the other end of the spectrum and consider entire web sub-sites
> distributed on CD-ROM or used in a promotional manner, and many people would
> be likely to cause a stink about that, even if they'd agreed to it earlier.
> And stinks are stinky, even if someone is stinking about something that's
> invalid.
And there is a cognitive difference between using GeoCities to post my own
content, and contributing to the content on ldraw.org or lugnet.com. In
the first case, I'm using the services of a large web-server to publish my
own content. In the other case, I'm part of a group collaborating (more or
less) on a fan-created site, with a single set of content.
Steve
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: markup syntax for member pages
|
| (...) heh heh, well, I guess geocities is out of the picture now, given the bad press they're getting: (URL) this whole recent Yahoo!/GeoCities stink yet another reason not to do full HTML hosting here. Not out of fear, but out of wisdom. The more (...) (25 years ago, 1-Jul-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
31 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
