Re: HTML 3.2 PR

Jim Wise (
Sat, 16 Nov 1996 03:34:46 -0500 (EST)

Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 03:34:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Jim Wise <>
To: Carl Morris <>
cc: Paul Prescod <>,
Subject: Re: HTML 3.2 PR
In-Reply-To: <>
Message-ID: <>

On Fri, 15 Nov 1996, Carl Morris wrote:

> 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

This is simply incorrect.  Have you _read_ the HTML spec?  It says
rpepeatedly ``HTML is an application of SGML''.  If you parse HTML, you
_are_ parsing SGML.  If you cannot parse SGML correctly, you cannot parse
SGML correctly.

> browser as is any other. Requiring <!DOCTYPE> is also "requiring" SGML

Perhaps.  At any rate, the standard _does_ require SGML.

> processing unless you will agree that to an HTML parser, <!> is a
> comment, or otherwise worthless.  To an author, its a completely

<!> means _nothing_ in standard HTML.  It _is_ worthless.

> 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

If you don't want to put a title on everything you write, that's fine.
But don't then claim that what you are writing is HTML.

				Jim Wise
				System Administrator
				GSAPP, Columbia University
				* Finger for PGP public key *