Public input to specs [was: HTML 3.2 -Reply ]

Daniel W. Connolly (
Fri, 10 May 1996 09:41:52 -0400

Message-Id: <>
To: (Walter Ian Kaye)
Subject: Public input to specs [was: HTML 3.2 -Reply ]
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 09 May 1996 19:09:01 PDT."
Date: Fri, 10 May 1996 09:41:52 -0400
From: "Daniel W. Connolly" <>

In message <v02140b01adb84cb993d1@[]>, Walter Ian Kaye writes:
>I would hope that the browser makers at least read this www-html list...
>ROLL CALL! Netscape? Microsoft? Are either of you still listening here???

I don't recommend you do this. I know that there was at least one
time when Netscape employees were bound by law not to talk about
future product plans in public forums.

I'm sure some of them do read this list, and a few more probably
scrounge the archives now and again.

But more to the point: I'm tasked with forwarding anything that looks
like a constructive criticism to the spec (e.g. the DIV wording, the
UL PLAIN and FIG input etc.) to the review board, and I often chair
the meetings where they get discussed. Dave Raggett also tries to keep
tabs on public forums, but he's got more writing assignments than I
do, so he does less of it. A few other W3C folks do the same.

We expect to track the issues raised in public review on a web
page, but we haven't started yet.

Toward that end, if you have technical input, please dedicate a whole
message to each issue, and keep it separate from process, politics,
and advocacy messages. Cite relavent sources, of course. Specific
examples, DTD changes and wording changes are best.

About FIG and Math: they are not dead. Math has a whole working group
to itself. Considerable resources are spent on it every week. FIG is
still very much in consideration, though not in exactly the form it
took in the March 95 HTML 3.0 draft.

Daniel W. Connolly        "We believe in the interconnectedness of all things"
Research Scientist, MIT/W3C     PGP: EDF8 A8E4 F3BB 0F3C  FD1B 7BE0 716C FF21