W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2009

Re: Publishing a new draft

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 17:50:49 +0200
To: "Leif Halvard Silli" <lhs@malform.no>
Cc: "Simon Pieters" <simonp@opera.com>, "Sam Ruby" <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "Laura Carlson" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.uxxvmzme64w2qv@annevk-t60>
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 17:33:20 +0200, Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no> wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Why not instead point to Appendix B in HTML 4, which itself lists some  
> things it considers badly supported, and tell which of those things are  
> now now not supported?

Proposal:

I turn "esoteric SGML features of HTML 4" into a link to that appendix and drop ", such as the NET syntax (i.e. <em/content/) and processing instructions" from the document.

Does that work?


My proposal of replacing ", but is not compatible with the more esoteric SGML features of HTML 4, such as the NET syntax (i.e. <em/content/) and processing instructions" with " The HTML syntax is no longer SGML-based" also still stands. I'd be willing to modify that to " The HTML syntax is no longer SGML-based, though is inspired by it" if that was your only concern.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Friday, 31 July 2009 15:51:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:51 UTC