Re: modules of charter

On 15 May 98, Al Gilman wrote:

> Meanwhile, I am not sure I sense a great groundswell of interest
> in answering the question "OK, what is the Next HTML?"

A point has been made that most of what is worth adding to HTML has been added. 
With the exception of a few attribute tweaks. Some have even said that "HTML is 
dead" despite the fact that (1) major browsers do not have complete or consistent 
support for HTML 4.0, DOM, and CSS2 (arguable even HTML 3.2 and CSS1).

> There is a great deal of interest in diversifying the types of
> documents used on the web.  There is waning support for the idea
> that there is one homogeneous language which supports all web
> documents.  People are voting, at least with their feet, to
> develop diversified Aps in XML.

That said, many documents won't require a special document type... HTML is fine for 
generic documents.


Rob