Re: How closed is the HTML 4.0 Draft?

Rob (wlkngowl@unix.asb.com)
Fri, 22 Aug 1997 01:22:08 -0500


Message-Id: <199708220530.BAA09500@unix.asb.com>
From: "Rob" <wlkngowl@unix.asb.com>
To: Jordan Reiter <jreiter@mail.slc.edu>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 01:22:08 -0500
CC: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: How closed is the HTML 4.0 Draft?

On 22 Aug 97, Jordan Reiter wrote:

> I personally think that a great deal of the arguments concerning ABBREV and
> ACRONYM seemed to be arguments for argumentation's sake.  I don't see why
> these elements, which may be useful but will not be very widely used, have
> to be mulled over so viciously.
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"Viciously"? 

The arguments over them are warranted because
(1) The only cover a subset of related terms (acronym excludes 
abbreviations, call letters, etc.)  There's also a desire to note 
special terms like proper names of people and places.
(2) There are some inconsistencies in the definition, or perceived
ones, that lead to some of the bickering/arguing.
(3) It's assumed some form of dictionary will clean up the loose 
ends, yet there is no dictionary type defined.

But enough about that (a separate thread): so how closed *is* the 
draft?

Rob

---
Robert Rothenburg Walking-Owl (wlkngowl@unix.asb.com)
(Se habla PGP.) http://www.wusb.org/mutant/