Date: Fri, 14 Oct 1994 00:02:58 -0500 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Earl Hood) Message-Id: <199410140502.AAA10072@imagine.convex.com> Subject: Re: Netscape & New HTML (This is being cc'ed to the www-html mailing list) In article <email@example.com>, Marc Andreessen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >> Taking a look at some "Netscape Friendly" HTML, I've noticed a whole bunch of >> new tags. :) Are these tags in the 2.0 spec or is MCC trying to redfine HTML? >(b) The new tags (documented for the time being in > http://home.mcom.com/home/services_docs/html-extensions.html) > are extensions to HTML as implemented in NCSA Mosaic for X 2.4 > and being codified as HTML 2.0. These extensions are the > result of a year and a half of a very large volume of requests to > Eric and I (the original NCSA Mosaic for X authors) for expanded > document layout and formatting control and address many of the specific > demands of the hundreds (thousands?) of document authors from whom > we've received feedback over that period of time. I can't count the > number of times people have requested text flowing around images, > control over font sizes, centering, etc. -- and we hope these new > extensions at least go partway to fulfilling many of those needs. Questions/concerns: I'm unclear if the html working group is aware of these 'enhancements' to HTML. I find it disturbing that with all the effort to standardize HTML, an organization goes and implements their own extensions. I thought the big push for a standard for HTML was to prevent additions/extensions from being added on "whims", but enhancements would go through a formal process so features of HTML do not become proprietary. Are these enhancements part of the proposed standard for HTML 3.0? Is there an SGML DTD that incorporates these features? Have these enhancements been suggested to the (2.0) working group? To the developers of HTML 3.0? Excuse me if I'm showing massive ignorance here, I do not have the time to keep up will all the going-ons of HTML development. --ewh P.S. Some of the enhancements are nice, while others are questionable.