Re: Comments on Cougar DTD

Marcus E. Hennecke (marcush@crc.ricoh.com)
Wed, 17 Jul 1996 12:02:22 -0700 (PDT)


Date: Wed, 17 Jul 1996 12:02:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Marcus E. Hennecke" <marcush@crc.ricoh.com>
Message-Id: <199607171902.MAA02740@cougar.crc.ricoh.com>
To: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: Comments on Cougar DTD

On Wed, 17 Jul 1996 19:56:04 +0200, galactus@stack.urc.tue.nl (Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet) wrote:
> In article <199607162128.OAA02376@cougar.crc.ricoh.com>,
> "Marcus E. Hennecke" <marcush@crc.ricoh.com> wrote:
> > Here are some of my comments on the recently posted Cougar DTD.
> May I add that we mark FONT and CENTER as deprecated, and remove the
> FACE attribute for FONT altogether? With the support for style sheets
> expected in the future, the FACE attribute is about as useful as
> BLINK.

I would support that motion.

> > 	<!ENTITY % ULStyle "plain|disc|square|circle">
> > 
> >    we could write <UL PLAIN>, common practice among certain browsers for
> >    some time now.
> 
> I would be very surprised if popular browsers would interpret
> <UL PLAIN> as <UL TYPE=plain> and render an unbulleted list.

But several browsers *already* support <UL PLAIN>. Allowing
<UL TYPE=PLAIN> is just a trick to make it valid SGML without adding
too many changes to the current Cougar DTD.

> > 6. Any reason why certain elements don't have %attrs; in the ATTLIST?
> >    Examples: ADDRESS (can't do <address class=signature>?), DIR, MENU,
> >    IMG (can't specify image size via style sheets?)
> 
> ALL block elements should have those attributes, including ALIGN and
> CLASS.

I thought so. I would assume that this was just an oversight.

Marcus
--
Marcus E. Hennecke
marcush@crc.ricoh.com        http://www.crc.ricoh.com/~marcush/