In the beginning, let there be HTML

J

Jukka K. Korpela

A flash from the past for those who have forgotten:

http://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/TheProject.html

The first website, brought back for the 20th birthday.

Last-Modified: Thu, 03 Dec 1992 08:37:20 GMT
they say; but the content at the URL has varied a lot, as once can see
at http://www.archive.org (where the oldest version is from 1998, saying
that the page has gone).

I can't remember whether they have actually reconstructed the historical
content or just something that looks like that. In the page source code,
'<NEXTID N="55">' looks genuine, but <HEADER> suggests some interference
from HTML5, doesn't it?

At http://info.cern.ch they celebrate the 20th birthday of something,
saying: 'On 30 April 1993 CERN published a statement that made World
Wide Web ("W3", or simply "the web") technology available on a
royalty-free basis.'

But at
http://web.archive.org/web/20121028121830/http://info.cern.ch/www20/
they say: 'March 2009: 20 years of the web'.

It's good to have several birthdays. Preferably, more than non-birth days.
 
C

Chris F.A. Johnson

Last-Modified: Thu, 03 Dec 1992 08:37:20 GMT
they say; but the content at the URL has varied a lot, as once can see
at http://www.archive.org (where the oldest version is from 1998, saying
that the page has gone).

I can't remember whether they have actually reconstructed the historical
content or just something that looks like that. In the page source code,
'<NEXTID N="55">' looks genuine, but <HEADER> suggests some interference
from HTML5, doesn't it?

No, it's outside the BODY.
 
L

Lewis

In message said:
2013-05-01 6:23, j wrote:
Last-Modified: Thu, 03 Dec 1992 08:37:20 GMT
they say; but the content at the URL has varied a lot, as once can see
at http://www.archive.org (where the oldest version is from 1998, saying
that the page has gone).
I can't remember whether they have actually reconstructed the historical
content or just something that looks like that. In the page source code,
'<NEXTID N="55">' looks genuine, but <HEADER> suggests some interference
from HTML5, doesn't it?

Header has nothing to do with html5.

I believe the current 'original' version was found in Sir Tim's
archives.
At http://info.cern.ch they celebrate the 20th birthday of something,
saying: 'On 30 April 1993 CERN published a statement that made World
Wide Web ("W3", or simply "the web") technology available on a
royalty-free basis.'
It's good to have several birthdays. Preferably, more than non-birth days.

March 1989 is when Sir Tim first proposed the idea of something that
became http and html. The first website went online in 1991, and the
oldest version of that page is from 1992. The 1993 'birthday' is the
real birthday of the web because it is when http and html were made
available for anyone to use for anything they wanted, free from patents
or royalties. Within 2 years the web exploded, and within another 2
years, most people were at least aware that it existed, even if it was a
"geek thing".
 
T

Tim Streater

Lewis said:
Header has nothing to do with html5.

I believe the current 'original' version was found in Sir Tim's
archives.




March 1989 is when Sir Tim first proposed the idea of something that
became http and html. The first website went online in 1991, and the
oldest version of that page is from 1992. The 1993 'birthday' is the
real birthday of the web because it is when http and html were made
available for anyone to use for anything they wanted, free from patents
or royalties. Within 2 years the web exploded, and within another 2
years, most people were at least aware that it existed, even if it was a
"geek thing".

I remember some of my SLAC colleagues rushing round in early 1992 in
excited discussions about the "World Wide Web". I didn't have a clue
what they were talking about.
 
J

Jukka K. Korpela

Header has nothing to do with html5.

My message was not entirely serious, but I really find it interesting
that the ancient page, or a replica of an ancient page, uses <HE­ADER>,
which *is* an HTML5 thing too. It is true that here <HEADER> is really
as Chris F.A. Johnson alluded to said:
March 1989 is when Sir Tim first proposed the idea of something that
became http and html.

Well, maybe. The early history of the web is poorly documented, and what
“Sir Tim†(who wasn’t Sir at that time) wrote that time can be construed
as the birth of the web in retrospect only.
The first website went online in 1991, and the
oldest version of that page is from 1992.

Around that time, the World Wide Web was demonstrated to me, and I was
underwhelmed. It was clearly inferior to the well-structured Gopher
system that serious people were working on. It had a line mode
interface, and it lacked structure and flexibility. The World Wide Web
that conquered the world later was really something rather different.
The 1993 'birthday' is the
real birthday of the web because it is when http and html were made
available for anyone to use for anything they wanted, free from patents
or royalties.

As I wrote, it’s good to have several birthdays. But the announcement in
1993 was rather irrelevant both from the perspective of that time and
from our view. The real change was the advent of Mosaic, the first
widely available graphic browser. The patent issue was just theory (even
in our time, computer programs as such are not patentable in the
European Union, and protocols and markup languages aren’t patentable
either, so this was all for US lawyers only).
Within 2 years the web exploded, and within another 2
years, most people were at least aware that it existed, even if it was a
"geek thing".

Well, even Mosaic wasn’t for the general audience really. The most
important explosion was related to the development of Internet
connections, more than anything else. I remember how I commented in 1995
that maybe some day people will be able to use the World Wide Web even
at home! Right, it was possible at that time too, in principle... but
with 1,200 bits per second it wasn’t too sexy. So we could find many
other birthdays, too, more relevant than those that have been
celebrated. Isn’t it nice when you can celebrate your 20th birthday over
and over again?
 
J

j

2013-05-01 6:23, j wrote:
Last-Modified: Thu, 03 Dec 1992 08:37:20 GMT
they say; but the content at the URL has varied a lot, as once can see
at http://www.archive.org (where the oldest version is from 1998, saying
that the page has gone).
I can't remember whether they have actually reconstructed the historical
content or just something that looks like that. In the page source code,
'<NEXTID N="55">' looks genuine, but <HEADER> suggests some interference
from HTML5, doesn't it?

Header has nothing to do with html5.[/QUOTE]

And no html wrapper. Is html still not a required tag?
I believe the current 'original' version was found in Sir Tim's
archives.

Well, if it was the very first web page,there would be no hyperlinks to
other sites.

Still, I find it interesting that every one of us looked at the source.
It's what we do. And the html still works.
days.

March 1989 is when Sir Tim first proposed the idea of something that
became http and html. The first website went online in 1991, and the
oldest version of that page is from 1992. The 1993 'birthday' is the
real birthday of the web because it is when http and html were made
available for anyone to use for anything they wanted, free from patents
or royalties. Within 2 years the web exploded, and within another 2
years, most people were at least aware that it existed, even if it was a
"geek thing".

I thought I was a late comer at the time in '95.

Jeff
 
L

Lewis

In message said:
2013-05-01 9:20, Lewis wrote:
My message was not entirely serious, but I really find it interesting
that the ancient page, or a replica of an ancient page, uses <HE­ADER>,
which *is* an HTML5 thing too. It is true that here <HEADER> is really
what later became <HEAD>, as Chris F.A. Johnson alluded to, if I
understood correctly. Heads, headers, headings – it’s really messy
Well, maybe. The early history of the web is poorly documented, and what
“Sir Tim†(who wasn’t Sir at that time) wrote that time can be construed
as the birth of the web in retrospect only.
Around that time, the World Wide Web was demonstrated to me, and I was
underwhelmed. It was clearly inferior to the well-structured Gopher
system that serious people were working on. It had a line mode
interface, and it lacked structure and flexibility. The World Wide Web
that conquered the world later was really something rather different.
As I wrote, it’s good to have several birthdays. But the announcement in
1993 was rather irrelevant both from the perspective of that time and
from our view. The real change was the advent of Mosaic, the first
widely available graphic browser. The patent issue was just theory (even
in our time, computer programs as such are not patentable in the
European Union, and protocols and markup languages aren’t patentable
either, so this was all for US lawyers only).
Well, even Mosaic wasn’t for the general audience really. The most
important explosion was related to the development of Internet
connections, more than anything else. I remember how I commented in 1995
that maybe some day people will be able to use the World Wide Web even
at home! Right, it was possible at that time too, in principle... but
with 1,200 bits per second it wasn’t too sexy. So we could find many
other birthdays, too, more relevant than those that have been
celebrated. Isn’t it nice when you can celebrate your 20th birthday over
and over again?

In 1995 I had a lot more than a 1200baud modem. I was connecting to a
UNIX machine (netcom first, then nyx.net), I'm pretty sure in 1995 I was
already using SLIP to get a GUI connection for Netscape 1.x. Probably
using a 14.4K dual standard modem.

Hmm. Actually, I think in 1995 the 56K modems were already out, though I
think we were not getting 56K connections to the modem pools that early.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,484
Members
44,904
Latest member
HealthyVisionsCBDPrice

Latest Threads

Top