- From: Joe English <joe@trystero.art.com>
- Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 10:08:18 PDT
- To: www-html@w3.org
- Cc: ehood@isogen.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
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 1996 13:08:48 UTC