W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > January 2000

RE: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (was: errata, http://www.w3.or g/ TR /xhtml1)

From: Dave J Woolley <DJW@bts.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 17:59:08 -0000
Message-ID: <81E4A2BC03CED111845100104B62AFB53F3F67@stagecoach.bts.co.uk>
To: "'www-html@w3.org'" <www-html@w3.org>
> From:	Ann Navarro [SMTP:ann@webgeek.com]
> What you're asking for is like Mercedes to announce that the Z3 is no
> longer a part of their product line. 
> It never was, it's part of the BMW product line. 
	The analogy is invalid, because frames are defined
	in the narrative part of the HTML 4 spec and in the
	transitional DTD, so they are "part of the product line".
	The fact that they get defined and then deleted in the
	same spec just reflects the messy politics.

	Just to recap:

	Why is target= not in XHTML?
	   Because it is not in HTML 4 strict.
	Why is it not in HTML 4 strict?
	   Because it is only required for frames (questionable)
	   and frames aren't in the HTML 4 strict DTD so that 
	   DTD also doesn't include target=

	   However, frames are in the HTML 4 transitional DTD
	   (as a conditional section triggered by the use of the
	   frameset DTD)

	   Everything else that it in HTML 4 transitional but not
	   HTML 4 strict is described as deprecated in the narrative
	   but frames are not.

	Consequence, of the few people who are aware that there is
	such a thing as HTML 4 strict, many will take the interpretation
	that the frameset DTD is not deprecated even though it does
	include the transitional and not the strict DTD.  Without
	a statement that the whole frames section in the narrative is
	really deprecated, most readers won't even realise that they
	are not permitted in the strict definition.
Received on Tuesday, 11 January 2000 13:03:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:52 UTC