> HTML is not only not object oriented, it is not even a procedural language.
Using developer tools in any browser will show you each object with the object attributes. HTML predefined all classes and the attributes associated with those classes (e.g. input, div, table, ...). These objects are javascript object compatible. Procedural functionality is provided by javascript. > HTML does not specify activities, it specifies content and markup. Forms and hyperlinks are activities. Most object types have "on" attributes which must specify a javascript function to be called. > CSS is *not* part of HTML Prior to CSS, styling was HTML (e.g. <font>). Now, each object has a style= attribute to eliminate the HTML tags associated with styling. The <style> tag was added to allow flexibility and eliminate repetition. Creating this new syntax to replace the old syntax does not exclude it as part of HTML. CSS does not have any meaning outside HTML. It's an extension to HTML. > CSS is likewise not a scripting language. What makes you think CSS can't automate a tasks using CSS? You can easily create drop down menu's without javascript. You can do animations without javascript. Do a web search. Clearly CSS is not strictly styling. It's scripting capabilities certainly are not standard but they do exist. > Javascript has nothing to do with NODEJS First line of nodejs.org says Node.js® is a JavaScript runtime built on Chrome's V8 JavaScript engine. They are the same language but NODEJS does not have many of the restrictions and eliminates the browser interface. > JavaScript is no more part of HTML than any other scripting language, e.g., > Perl. Javascript was created by Netscape as an extension to HTML (client and server). Eventually the client side extension (web browser) was accepted as a standard but not for any other HTTP server. In 2009, NODEJS pulled javascript out of the browser and modified it to support a non-browser environment. > "a single instruction that expands automatically into a set > of instructions to perform a particular task." matches the way "macro" has > been used since the 1950s. Prior to 1970, what professional macro languages had the functionality of a copybook? Unix and C came onto the scene in the 70's. Assembler macro's had if and goto. There's a reason IBM never referred to copybooks as macro's. Was there actually someone who even created a good definition for macro's? Jon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
