Re: My humble comments on the HTML 4.0 draft

Steve Cheng (
Wed, 9 Jul 1997 15:21:49 -0400 (EDT)

Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 15:21:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steve Cheng <>
Subject: Re: My humble comments on the HTML 4.0 draft
In-Reply-To: <>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.970709150050.230D-100000@elmert>

I'll add more questions to the list...

1. In what situations should the Q element be used? For example, there is a
difference between quoting Shakespeare and dialog quotes in a narrative

2. In terms of language, content type, title (attribute), etc., should a
document rely on the HTTP-given information, or should the information be
hardcoded (in various attributes) into an HTML document?

3. What are meta data profiles? The explanation in the specs isn't clear.

4. In the section: Links in HTML documents / Elements that define links, the
spec says:

  Although LINK has no content, the relationships it define may be rendered
  by some user agents.

It appears to me that "some user agents" implies this element may not be
supported, which would defeat the usefulness of this element.

5. The Table element (and various related elements) contains many attributes
like width, cellpadding, etc. Shouldn't these presentation attributes be

6. Some elements have scripting attributes. The separation of scripting and
structural markup has been discussed already (perhaps scripting should
become a separate spec), but there are no provisions for indicating what
scripting language is being used, unlike inline styles.

7. The lang attribute in many elements accept only some two-letter standard.
It is possible however that an "English" document can contain many
non-standard terms (e.g. jargon). Does the spec just ignore this issue? (its
too complex anyway)

Steve Cheng