Re: %flow and headers and address

Stuart Young (nakor@glasswings.com.au)
Wed, 2 Oct 1996 00:48:00 +1000 (EST)


Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 00:48:00 +1000 (EST)
From: Stuart Young <nakor@glasswings.com.au>
To: Foteos Macrides <MACRIDES@SCI.WFBR.EDU>
cc: pflynn@curia.ucc.ie, www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: %flow and headers and address
In-Reply-To: <01IA33A6ZMNS0090D7@SCI.WFBR.EDU>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.961002003957.26786B-100000@fizzgig.glasswings.com.au>

On Mon, 30 Sep 1996, Foteos Macrides wrote:

> 	Have you included stuff from the MicroSoft DTD?  What I'm
> envisioning is an EVERYTHING.DTD with anything any client has
> implemented *and*(/or) has been documented (/proposed) formally
> (via a public DTD), fitted together so that it all fits together
> if it can, such that any other client could implement any or all
> of it rationally, and any provider could include any combination
> in a document instance and pass that to a validator.

Some type of 'sectioning' of what is actually there would be good.

Basically what I mean is some way either in the DTD to make a validator 
actually "know" what areas of the DTD have been used, and showing them, 
or some form of validator that'll allow such a distinction.

It'd be useful to know that a page contains say, MSIE, Netscape, and HTML 
3.2 based code, by running it past a validator using said DTD. Apart from 
the fact it vaildates, you know what declaration types are used, and can 
treat the document accordingly.

This could also point out things like 'You are using HTML 1.0 code that 
has been depreciated, along with HTML 3.2 code.', so you can be warned if 
you are making a mistake.

/--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
| Stuart Young (aka Cefiar)  - You may be human, but you're still animals! |
| nakor@glasswings.com.au - Man is territorial. Violence is our response.  |
\--------------------------------------------------------------------------/