Re: How closed is the HTML 4.0 Draft?

Rob (
Fri, 22 Aug 1997 01:22:08 -0500

Message-Id: <>
From: "Rob" <>
To: Jordan Reiter <>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 01:22:08 -0500
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.

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 


Robert Rothenburg Walking-Owl (
(Se habla PGP.)