www-html@w3.org from January 2000 by author

Albert Lunde

• Re: Physical markup concept snag (Wednesday, 19 January)

Ann Navarro

• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Friday, 14 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Friday, 14 January)
• Re: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (Tuesday, 11 January)
• Re: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (Tuesday, 11 January)
• RE: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (was: errata, http://www.w3.org/ TR /xhtml1) (Tuesday, 11 January)
• RE: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (was: errata, http://www.w3.org/ TR /xhtml1) (Tuesday, 11 January)
• RE: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (was: errata, http://www.w3.org/TR /xhtml1) (Tuesday, 11 January)

Arjun Ray

• Re: OBJECT (was Re: So, what's left?) (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: OBJECT (was Re: So, what's left?) (Monday, 31 January)
• Case Folding (was: XHTML/XML comment) (Monday, 31 January)
• Re: Error in strict DTD? (Monday, 31 January)
• Re: XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)
• XHTML 1.0 is a Rec (Friday, 28 January)
• Re: [OT] Online Dictionary (was:... process...) (Thursday, 27 January)
• [OT] Online Dictionary (was:... process...) (Thursday, 27 January)
• Re: not closed by process rules [was: So, what's left?] (Thursday, 27 January)
• Re: not closed by process rules [was: So, what's left?] (Wednesday, 26 January)
• XHTML Family User Agent Conformance (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: not closed by process rules [was: So, what's left?] (Wednesday, 26 January)
• [HOWTO META] This is hopeless, actually (Wednesday, 26 January)
• XHTML Naming Rules - FPIs (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: not closed by process rules [was: So, what's left?] (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: So, what's left? (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: So, what's left? (Tuesday, 25 January)
• RE: So, what's left? (Monday, 24 January)
• Architectural Validation Only? (Monday, 24 January)
• RE: Using Entity References in XSL Templates (Monday, 24 January)
• RE: Using Entity References in XSL Templates (Monday, 24 January)
• Re: What am I doing wrong? (Thursday, 20 January)
• XHTML and Architectures (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Wednesday, 19 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Wednesday, 19 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Wednesday, 19 January)
• Re: frames targeting FEATURE REQUEST (Tuesday, 18 January)
• re: Frames and People With Napoleanic Issues >> (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: XHTML 1.1 (Tuesday, 18 January)
• XHTML Naming Rules (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Sunday, 16 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Sunday, 16 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Saturday, 15 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Friday, 14 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Friday, 14 January)
• Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Friday, 14 January)

ben van't ende

• printing html (Friday, 28 January)

Bjoern Hoehrmann

• Re: HTML 4.0 gone - horrendous (Tuesday, 4 January)

Chris Wilson

• RE: printing html (Friday, 28 January)
• RE: Microsoft browsers (Monday, 3 January)

Christian Ottosson

• encoding attribute in XML declaration (Thursday, 20 January)
• Undeprecated removals in XHTML 1.1 (Tuesday, 11 January)

Christopher Luebcke

• RE: XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)

Dan Connolly

• Re: XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)
• Re: XHTML/XML comment (case sensitivity an I18N, redux) (Monday, 31 January)
• Re: not closed by process rules [was: So, what's left?] (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: not closed by process rules [was: So, what's left?] (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: not closed by process rules [was: So, what's left?] (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: not closed by process rules [was: So, what's left?] (Wednesday, 26 January)
• not closed by process rules [was: So, what's left?] (Wednesday, 26 January)
• Re: unicode or multibyte characters in URLs in HTML (Friday, 21 January)
• Re: ISO/IEC refs to HTML4 (Wednesday, 19 January)
• Re: ISO/IEC refs to HTML4 (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: forms - checkbox labels and wrapping (Tuesday, 4 January)

Daniel Hiester

• Re: XHTMLINATLA (Tuesday, 25 January)
• Re: Physical markup concept snag (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Saturday, 15 January)
• Re: Printing the URL next to the link (was:RE: Fixed table width) (Friday, 7 January)
• Re: microsoft browsers (Monday, 3 January)

Daniel S. Riley

• Re: So, what's left? (Monday, 24 January)

Dave J Woolley

• RE: printing html (Friday, 28 January)
• RE: frames: why they must be destroyed (Wednesday, 26 January)
• RE: Frames and People With Napoleanic Issues >> (Tuesday, 18 January)
• RE: Embed attribute for LINK element (Tuesday, 18 January)
• RE: User Authentication and Forms (Tuesday, 18 January)
• RE: Frames and People With Napoleanic Issues >> (Monday, 17 January)
• RE: frames targeting FEATURE REQUEST (Monday, 17 January)
• RE: Embed attribute for LINK element (Monday, 17 January)
• RE: Embed attribute for LINK element (Monday, 17 January)
• RE: SSI and CGI (Friday, 14 January)
• RE: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (was: errata, http://www.w3.or g/ TR /xhtml1) (Tuesday, 11 January)
• RE: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (was: errata, http://www.w3.org/ TR /xhtml1) (Tuesday, 11 January)
• RE: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (was: errata, http://www.w3.org/ TR /xhtml1) (Tuesday, 11 January)
• Status of Frames in HTML 4 (was: errata, http://www.w3.org/TR/xht ml1) (Tuesday, 11 January)
• RE: Preventing Refer field from being sent by browsers? (Monday, 10 January)
• RE: Fixed table width (Monday, 10 January)
• RE: Reg Table (Tuesday, 4 January)

Dave Raggett

• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Friday, 14 January)
• Re: forms - checkbox labels and wrapping (Monday, 10 January)
• Re: HTML 4.0 gone - horrendous (Monday, 3 January)
• XHTML 1.0 PR - Please chase your AC REP (Monday, 3 January)

David Megginson

• Re: tricky XHTML 1.0 namespace question (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: tricky XHTML 1.0 namespace question (Monday, 17 January)

David Wagner

• RE: So, what's left? (Monday, 24 January)
• So, what's left? (Monday, 24 January)

Draeken, Stephanie

• Remove from mailing list (Monday, 3 January)

Eric Eldred

• Q (Friday, 21 January)
• Re: target="_new" - I won't miss it (was: ...Napoleanic Issues) (Wednesday, 19 January)
• Re: Frames and People With Napoleanic Issues >> (Tuesday, 18 January)

Eric Richards

• www.w3c.org on CDROM (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: microsoft browsers (Wednesday, 5 January)

fantasai

• HTML4 Tables: row groups (Saturday, 22 January)

Francis X. Speiser Jr.

• XHTML/XML (Monday, 31 January)
• Re: a question on how to break the pvt message in chat rooms? (Monday, 31 January)
• frames continued (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Frames and People With Napoleanic Issues >> (Monday, 17 January)

Frank Boumphrey

• Re: XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)
• Re: XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)
• Re: XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)

G. James Berigan

• Re: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (Tuesday, 11 January)
• Re: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (Tuesday, 11 January)
• Re: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (Tuesday, 11 January)
• Re: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (Tuesday, 11 January)
• Re: HTML 4.0 gone - horrendous (Monday, 3 January)

Georg Berg

• Visited link, Extra feature wanted (Monday, 24 January)

Gulliver, Deanna XWAVE

• RE: Frames and People With Napoleanic Issues >> (Monday, 17 January)

Henry S. Thompson

• Re: tricky XHTML 1.0 namespace question (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: tricky XHTML 1.0 namespace question (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: tricky XHTML 1.0 namespace question (Monday, 17 January)

Ian Hickson

• Error in HTML4.01 specification; section 6.12 (Wednesday, 12 January)

Ian Jacobs

• Re: Error in HTML4.01 specification; section 6.12 (Wednesday, 12 January)

Ignacio Javier

• Re: microsoft browsers (Sunday, 2 January)
• microsoft browsers (Sunday, 2 January)

j proctor

• Physical markup concept snag (Wednesday, 19 January)

James Comas

• xhtml - xml declaration & IE 4.5 Mac (Saturday, 1 January)

James Salsman

• device upload truly needed, and soon (Monday, 10 January)

Jan Roland Eriksson

• Re: So, what's left? (Tuesday, 25 January)
• Re: Physical markup concept snag (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Physical markup concept snag (Thursday, 20 January)
• What am I doing wrong? (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: ISO/IEC refs to HTML4 (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: ISO/IEC refs to HTML4 (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Tuesday, 18 January)
• ISO/IEC refs to HTML4 (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Embed attribute for LINK element (Monday, 17 January)

Jeffrey

• Re: microsoft browsers (Sunday, 2 January)

Jelks Cabaniss

• xHTML 1.0 and non-well-formed XML (Friday, 28 January)

Jennifer Pereira

• Process for site development (Monday, 31 January)

Johannes Ewalt Koch

• XHTML 1.1 (Monday, 10 January)

John Cowan

• Re: tricky XHTML 1.0 namespace question (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Friday, 14 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Friday, 14 January)
• Request for change to XHTML Basic (Wednesday, 12 January)

John Whelan

• Re: Physical markup concept snag (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (Tuesday, 11 January)
• Re: Status of Iframe in XHTML 1.1 (Wednesday, 12 January)

Jonathan Wright (DNA)

• RE: SSI and CGI (Thursday, 13 January)
• SSI and CGI (Thursday, 13 January)

Jonny Axelsson

• Re: OBJECT (was Re: So, what's left?) (Monday, 31 January)
• Re: XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)
• OBJECT (was Re: So, what's left?) (Monday, 31 January)

JOrendorff@ixl.com

• RE: not closed by process rules [was: So, what's left?] (Wednesday, 26 January)
• RE: frames: why they must be destroyed (Monday, 24 January)
• RE: Physical markup concept snag (Monday, 24 January)
• RE: Physical markup concept snag (Friday, 21 January)
• RE: target="_new" - I won't miss it (was: ...Napoleanic Issues) (Wednesday, 19 January)
• target="_new" - I won't miss it (was: ...Napoleanic Issues) (Tuesday, 18 January)
• frames: why they must be destroyed (Tuesday, 18 January)
• RE: Status of Iframe in XHTML 1.1 (Wednesday, 12 January)
• Status of Iframe in XHTML 1.1 (Wednesday, 12 January)
• RE: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (was: errata, http://www.w3.org/TR /xhtml1) (Wednesday, 12 January)
• RE: Status of Frames in HTML 4 (was: errata, http://www.w3.org/TR /xhtml1) (Tuesday, 11 January)
• RE: errata, http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1 (Monday, 10 January)
• RE: forms - checkbox labels and wrapping (Tuesday, 4 January)

jose.kahan@w3.org

• Re: What am I doing wrong? (Tuesday, 18 January)

Jukka Korpela

• HTML 4.0 gone - horrendous (Monday, 3 January)

Jukka.Korpela@hut.fi

• Re: input type="image" takes no name or value? (Monday, 24 January)
• Re: Physical markup concept snag (Thursday, 20 January)

Karl Dubost

• Re: XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)
• xHTML 1.0 French Version (Sunday, 30 January)
• xHTML 1.0 French Version (Monday, 31 January)

Karl Ove Hufthammer

• W3C links causing unnecessary redirects (Monday, 3 January)

Karlsson Kent - keka

• RE: XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: Physical markup concept snag (Thursday, 20 January)
• RE: Physical markup concept snag (Thursday, 20 January)

Kay Michael

• RE: Using Entity References in XSL Templates (Monday, 24 January)

Kristina Lengyel

• HTML Data Mining Tool (Monday, 17 January)

Laura Short

• Table height (Saturday, 29 January)

MaheshKT

• a question on how to break the pvt message in chat rooms? (Monday, 31 January)

Masayasu Ishikawa

• Re: ISO/IEC refs to HTML4 (Wednesday, 19 January)
• Re: Undeprecated removals in XHTML 1.1 (Monday, 17 January)
• Removal of the lang attribute (was Re: Status of Iframe in XHTML 1.1) (Friday, 14 January)

Matthew Brealey

• Re: Embed attribute for LINK element (Tuesday, 18 January)
• RE: Embed attribute for LINK element (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: Embed attribute for LINK element (Monday, 17 January)
• Embed attribute for LINK element (Monday, 17 January)

Meg Littlefield

• lowercase tags required in the future? (Saturday, 15 January)

Michael Ducharme

• Fixed table width (Friday, 7 January)

Michael Hamm

• Re: Physical markup concept snag (Friday, 21 January)
• Re: URL changes in HTML4 (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: ISO/IEC refs to HTML4 (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Embed attribute for LINK element (Monday, 17 January)

Mike Brown

• xml:space incorrectly declared in all 3 XHTML 1.0 DTDs (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: Using Entity References in XSL Templates (Monday, 24 January)
• RE: Using Entity References in XSL Templates (Friday, 21 January)

Morten Wang

• Re: target="_new" - I won't miss it (was: ...Napoleanic Issues) (Wednesday, 19 January)

Murray Altheim

• Re: Error in strict DTD? (Monday, 31 January)
• Re: OBJECT (was Re: So, what's left?) (Monday, 31 January)
• Re: XHTMLINATLA (Tuesday, 25 January)
• Re: XHTMLINATLA (Tuesday, 25 January)
• Re: So, what's left? (Monday, 24 January)
• Re: So, what's left? (Monday, 24 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: lowercase tags required in the future? (Wednesday, 19 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Wednesday, 19 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Wednesday, 19 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: ISO/IEC refs to HTML4 (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Undeprecated removals in XHTML 1.1 (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Sunday, 16 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Saturday, 15 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Saturday, 15 January)
• Re: Status of Iframe in XHTML 1.1 (Friday, 14 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Friday, 14 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Friday, 14 January)
• Re: Request for change to XHTML Basic (Wednesday, 12 January)
• Re: Status of Iframe in XHTML 1.1 (Wednesday, 12 January)

Nick Traenkner

• input type="image" takes no name or value? (Friday, 21 January)

Nicole Goranko

• frames targeting FEATURE REQUEST (Saturday, 8 January)

Nikolai Vogel

• Re: SSI and CGI (Thursday, 13 January)
• Re: SSI and CGI (Thursday, 13 January)
• Re: SSI and CGI (Thursday, 13 January)

Nir Dagan

• Re: XHTML/XML (Monday, 31 January)
• Re: XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: printing html (Friday, 28 January)
• Re: XHTMLINATLA (Tuesday, 25 January)
• Re: So, what's left? (Tuesday, 25 January)
• Re: Visited link, Extra feature wanted (Monday, 24 January)
• RE: Physical markup concept snag (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Physical markup concept snag (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Printing the URL next to the link (was:RE: Fixed table width) (Saturday, 8 January)
• Printing the URL next to the link (was:RE: Fixed table width) (Friday, 7 January)

Padmanabhan, Arun

• Table Caption Align Attribute.. (Friday, 21 January)

Pavel Nejedly

• Re: Embed attribute for LINK element (Monday, 17 January)

Piers Williams

• RE: lowercase tags required in the future? (Wednesday, 19 January)
• RE: Fixed table width (Friday, 7 January)

Pillai, Girish

• [www-html] <none> (Friday, 21 January)

redstart

• errata, http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1 (Friday, 7 January)

rev-bob@gotc.com

• RE: XHTML/XML (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: Process for site development (Monday, 31 January)
• RE: XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)
• re: RE: Frames and People With Napoleanic Issues >> (Tuesday, 18 January)
• re: Frames and People With Napoleanic Issues >> (Tuesday, 18 January)
• re: lowercase tags required in the future? (Monday, 17 January)
• re: Re: microsoft browsers (Monday, 3 January)

Roy.Gardiner@natwest.com

• RE: Frames and People With Napoleanic Issues >> (Tuesday, 18 January)

Russell Steven Shawn O'Connor

• Re: OBJECT (was Re: So, what's left?) (Tuesday, 1 February)
• Re: Physical markup concept snag (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Physical markup concept snag (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Physical markup concept snag (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Thursday, 20 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Tuesday, 18 January)

Sattara

• Fw: User Authentication and Forms (Tuesday, 18 January)

schnitz@overflow.de

• Re: forms - checkbox labels and wrapping (Tuesday, 4 January)

semwamufiya@vassar.edu

• oblique and vertical alignment in layers (Tuesday, 25 January)

Shane P. McCarron

• Re: XHTML 1.1 (Tuesday, 11 January)

Simon St.Laurent

• Re: tricky XHTML 1.0 namespace question (Monday, 17 January)
• tricky XHTML 1.0 namespace question (Monday, 17 January)

Suzanne Topping

• Re: [www-html] <none> (Friday, 21 January)

Tantek Çelik

• Re: OBJECT (was Re: So, what's left?) (Monday, 31 January)
• Re: XHTML/XML (Monday, 31 January)
• Re: So, what's left? (Tuesday, 25 January)
• Re: So, what's left? (Tuesday, 25 January)
• Re: Embed attribute for LINK element (Monday, 17 January)

Ted Cohn

• Preventing Refer field from being sent by browsers? (Friday, 7 January)

The Boland Family

• Re: HELP ON LAYERS PLEASE (Friday, 31 December)

Todd Fahrner

• Re: XHTMLINATLA (Tuesday, 25 January)
• RE: Physical markup concept snag (Thursday, 20 January)

Vidiot

• XHTML/XML comment (Monday, 31 January)

Vieri Di_paola

• RV: Campaña NN UU (fwd) (Monday, 24 January)
• fill form (Wednesday, 12 January)

Virtual Czarina

• Re: microsoft browsers (Sunday, 2 January)

W. Eliot Kimber

• Re: WEK: Comments on XHTML 1.1 5 Jan 2000 Draft (and related specs) (Tuesday, 25 January)
• Re: Architectural Validation Only? (Tuesday, 25 January)
• WEK: Comments on XHTML 1.1 5 Jan 2000 Draft (and related specs) (Tuesday, 25 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Wednesday, 19 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Tuesday, 18 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Monday, 17 January)
• Re: Why DOCTYPE Declarations for XHTML? (Monday, 17 January)

Walter Ian Kaye

• Re: not closed by process rules [was: So, what's left?] (Wednesday, 26 January)
• XHTMLINATLA (Tuesday, 25 January)
• RE: Using Entity References in XSL Templates (Monday, 24 January)
• RE: target="_new" - I won't miss it (was: ...Napoleanic Issues) (Thursday, 20 January)
• RE: Frames and People With Napoleanic Issues >> (Wednesday, 19 January)
• RE: forms - checkbox labels and wrapping (Wednesday, 5 January)
• Re: forms - checkbox labels and wrapping (Tuesday, 4 January)
• forms - checkbox labels and wrapping (Tuesday, 4 January)
• Re: microsoft browsers (Sunday, 2 January)

wgzhu@quoininc.com

• javascript (Wednesday, 19 January)

XMLGuy

• Re: Error in strict DTD? (Monday, 31 January)
• Error in strict DTD? (Monday, 31 January)

Last message date: Monday, 31 January 2000 20:14:18 UTC