Re: SGML markup declarations for Frames

Joe English (joe@trystero.art.com)
Tue, 03 Sep 1996 10:08:18 PDT


Message-Id: <9609031708.AA29719@trystero.art.com>
To: www-html@w3.org
Cc: ehood@isogen.com
Subject: Re: SGML markup declarations for Frames
In-Reply-To: <199609031513.KAA27282@bonk.isogen.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 10:08:18 PDT
From: Joe English <joe@trystero.art.com>


Earl Hood <ehood@isogen.com> wrote:

> The Cougar DTD is lacking markup declarations for frame markup.  Hence
> here is a modified version of the DTD that includes frames with associated
> diff.

A couple notes:

> <![ %HTML.Deprecated [
>     <!ENTITY % html.content "HEAD, BODY, PLAINTEXT?">
> ]]>
>
> <!ENTITY % html.content "HEAD, (BODY | FRAMESET)">
>
> <!ELEMENT HTML O O  (%html.content)>

Since HTML.Deprecated is set by default to "INCLUDE",
the first declaration for html.content takes precedence.

Also, with:

    <!ELEMENT HTML O O  (HEAD, (BODY | FRAMESET)) >

it is no longer legal to omit the <BODY> start-tag,
since the BODY element isn't contextually required anymore.
If Cougar is to maintain backwards-compatibility
with existing documents, FRAMESET documents will
have to use a different document type.

 * * *

As an aside, I don't think that "backwards compatibility
with existing documents" is a worthwhile design goal
for Cougar; that goal is already served by the HTML 2.0
and HTML 3.2 DTDs.  A more important goal for HTML 3.N>2
would IMO be trying to ensure forward-compatibility
with later versions of the standard.  This woud entail,
among other things, mandating start- and end-tags for
HEAD and BODY, and getting rid of HTML.Deprecated.

Any thoughts?


--Joe English

  joe@art.com