Re: HTML 3.2 PR

Carl Morris (
Fri, 15 Nov 1996 20:54:01 -0600

Message-Id: <>
From: "Carl Morris" <>
To: "Paul Prescod" <>,
Subject: Re: HTML 3.2 PR
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 20:54:01 -0600

| HTML *is* SGML. <! > is *not* a comment. HTML user agents *do* use
| information in <! >. Those that validate documents, for instance,
will look
| at the DOCTYPE to determine which version of HTML to validate

Lets get one thing right here right now.  SGML is not required for
HTML...  I do acknowledge that it is ideal to insure than an SGML
parser can process HTML is HTML is SGML, but saying so does not require
an HTML parser to use SGML semantics.  As you should note, many do not!
(which is actually bad because they are so buggy when it comes down to
simple SGML rules)..

I do not however like the idea of the <!DOCTYPE> suggestion nor the
content type suggestion.  HTML 3 is just as viewable on an HTML 1.0
browser as is any other.  Requiring <!DOCTYPE> is also "requiring" SGML
processing unless you will agree that to an HTML parser, <!> is a
comment, or otherwise worthless.  To an author, its a completely
different story, but I still don't want to be forced to put such
declarations, just like I don't want to be forced to TITLE everything I
write (I always hated that in School, now the rest of the world seems
to think we should!)