Re: What ever happened to <person>, <abbrev> etc. tags

Abigail (abigail@fnx.com)
Sun, 13 Apr 1997 03:34:24 -0400 (EDT)


From: abigail@fnx.com (Abigail)
Message-Id: <199704130734.DAA13692@fnx.com>
Subject: Re: What ever happened to <person>, <abbrev> etc. tags
To: walter@natural-innovations.com (Walter Ian Kaye)
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 1997 03:34:24 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: www-html@w3.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SGI.3.95.970411003948.20730A-100000@shellx.best.com> from "Walter Ian Kaye" at Apr 11, 97 01:08:29 am

You, Walter Ian Kaye, wrote:
++ 
++ On Fri, 11 Apr 1997, Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl' wrote:
++ 
++ > Somewhere between 3.0 and 3.2 a bunch of 'logical' tags like <person> 
++ > <abbrev> and <acronym> were removed.
++ 
++ Actually, nothing was removed from 3.0 -- it simply withered away and died.
++ 3.2 does not linearly replace 3.0, it simply follows it numerically. I know
++ this doesn't make sense to you; it doesn't really make sense to anyone else
++ either! It's just the way things turned out, for a variety of reasons.
++ 
++ HTML 3.0 was designed by committee; 3.2 grew from the marketplace. You could
++ think of an immovable object (committee desires) meeting an irresistible force
++ (the market, aka NCC and MS), and the result is an unfortunate nonlinearity in
++ the development of HTML.


I think 2.3 would have been a much better number. 

BTW, you can still use <person>, <abbrev>, <acronym>. It degrades
gracefully on non-HTML 3.0 browsers.


Abigail