Re: <a footnote="proposal">

Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no
Thu, 17 Oct 1996 17:14:11 +0200


From: Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no
To: Chris Lilley <Chris.Lilley@sophia.inria.fr>
cc: lee@sq.com, html-wg@w3.org, marc@ckm.ucsf.edu, pflynn@CURIA.UCC.IE,
Subject: Re: <a footnote="proposal">
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 17 Oct 1996 15:09:23 +0200." <9610171509.ZM26204@grommit.inria.fr>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 17:14:11 +0200
Message-ID: <8203.845565251@domen.uninett.no>


Chris.Lilley@sophia.inria.fr said:
> Since this is to be an experimental (forward looking) rather than 
> existing practice (backward looking) document, the fact that 
> something is not in HTML 3.2 is not a problem. 

Right you are - but since RFCs are permanent once published, I really
*hate* references that end up pointing nowhere, like current references
to HTML 3.0 do - and Cougar and the current HTML 3.2 draft are just
that, drafts.

Chris.Lilley@sophia.inria.fr said:
> All links, or just the ones for which a button is appropriate? 
User's choice? This user thinks that links that the browser doesn't
know about should be displayed by default somehow, but I'm not exactly
a typical user...

have fun - it would be great to see this doc published!

                      Harald