Re: ISO/IEC 10646 as Document Character Set

>> Many of the sites are not "customers".  They are universities taking
>> part in this great thing called WWW.  Why should anybody consciously
>> destroy the interoperability that these folks are enjoying?
>People always confuse 'writing the standard' with 'making people
>change their code or server'. What we write as the standard for HTML
>2.0 won't become the standard for at least 6 months. We *don't* have
>to include the transition plan in the same document that includes the
>standard. We're not "destroying" interoperability by writing down a
>standard that we think is the right thing to do, especially if we
>think there *is* a transition plan.

I agree that a separate transition plan document could be a good idea.


Received on Wednesday, 3 May 1995 20:35:51 UTC