At 3:16 PM -0000 7/15/97, Simon Pockley wrote:
>Andrew Daviel wrote
>
>>The concept of a personal homepage
>
>Until we have some form of rechargeable paper, these are not 'pages' they do
>not resemble pages in any way. One screen might contain 100 pages if printed.
> Screens have a different aspect ratio a diffferent look , a different feel,
>contain different kinds of information and have a different set of paradigms
>altogether. Many can't be printed at all.
>
>The discussion about resource types suggests that there are some people out
>there who still think of these screens as some form of paper. Time to realise
>that there is another medium out there with completely different archival
>demands. These demands will not be met by ignoring their existence.
>
>If you want a term for the front screen - just use 'home'.
Except that "Home" is not a resource type, anymore than a homepage is a
where your heart is. Homepages do in fact exist and are recognized as a
common term meaning what you call "home". I don't know where you've been
but everyone everywhere understands the term webpage to mean a single HTML
document--one that may, *when printed*, come out to several pages, nay,
hundreds, as you rightly say. And yet, mightn't one abstract the term
"page" a bit? Eh? Abstract it to the point where *everyone* understands
already just what a homepage is?
C'mon. Don't make this any harder than it is. Everyone *knows* what a
homepage is and can conceive of it very clearly and comprehensibly (sp?).
There's no need to complicate it using a term that means nothing close.
--------------------------------------------------------
[ Jordan Reiter ]
[ mailto:[log in to unmask] ]
[ "You can't just say, 'I don't want to get involved.' ]
[ The universe got you involved." --Hal Lipset, P.I. ]
--------------------------------------------------------
|