Re: Body start tag.

Paul Prescod (papresco@technologist.com)
Wed, 16 Jul 1997 16:07:57 -0500


Message-ID: <33CD2A1D.3E6AA2E0@technologist.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 16:07:57 -0500
From: Paul Prescod <papresco@technologist.com>
To: Joe English <joe@trystero.art.com>
CC: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: Body start tag.

Joe English wrote:
> Have you considered using two different root element types?
> 
>         <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0//EN">
>         <!-- "normal" document ... -->
> 
>         <!DOCTYPE FRAMEDOC PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0//EN">
>         <!-- "frameset" document ... -->

That was my idea when I first saw frames. They are really a very
different "document type" than your typical HTML document. This is why
we are running into these implied start tag problems. Any "real" HTML
document has a single required BODY, so it is convenient to leave off
the tags. I have no precise definition for what is a "real" document but
any document class that requires radical changes to the HTML DTD and
where instances of the class use a radically different mix of elements
and attributes should probably be a "different" document type with its
own different, but related DTD. We might find that letting the two
evolve separately will allow some innovations in FRAMES that would have
been difficult as part of HTML.

 Paul Prescod