Re: HTML 3.2

Daniel W. Connolly (connolly@beach.w3.org)
Tue, 07 May 1996 23:32:01 -0400


Message-Id: <m0uGzyr-0002U5C@beach.w3.org>
To: Mike Wexler <mwexler@frame.com>
Cc: Charles Peyton Taylor <CTaylor@wposmtp.nps.navy.mil>, www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: HTML 3.2 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 07 May 1996 15:10:17 PDT."
             <9605072210.AA23947@orion> 
Date: Tue, 07 May 1996 23:32:01 -0400
From: "Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@beach.w3.org>

In message <9605072210.AA23947@orion>, Mike Wexler writes:
>By the way, is there an HTML 3.2 spec? I found a DTD and a features
>at a glance document, but no spec.

That's all we've got so far. We think the technical details of
the DTD are pretty close to finished, but we haven't figured
out exactly what sort of write up will serve best. We've considered
having somebody who's written a highly-regarded HTML book or
online reference guide write it up.

We're also noodling about test suites...

And stay tuned for news about a new validation service...

>In http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/MarkUp/Wilbur, the DIV element is defined as:
>   DIV document divisions
>      Requres start and end tags. It is used with the ALIGN
>      attribute to set the text alignment of the block of 
>      elements it contains. ALIGN can be one of LEFT, CENTER, or
>      RIGHT.
>
>Why is there no mentioning of its structural purpose of grouping together
>related elements.

I'm not sure. Dave put that write-up together in short order.
I'm sure he intends to revise it. Perhaps you could suggest some
wording?

>There is no alignment implied. Am I missing something.
>Is this reasonable HTML 3.2 markup?

I tend to think so.

I think the issue of the CLASS attribute could be opened up.

We haven't decided whether putting CLASS in there will increase or
decrease confusion, since it doesn't have any observable effect in
many cases.

Dan