- From: Arjun Ray <aray@q2.net>
- Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 14:01:15 -0400 (EDT)
- To: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
On Thu, 5 Jun 1997, Paul Prescod wrote: > > Netscape sees a strong need for a conditional-inclusion facility in XML. > > The historical absence of such a facility in HTML has led to problematic > > features such as <NOFRAMES>. > > Could you please remind me what is problematic about NOFRAMES? It's b.a.d. (Broken As Designed), occassioned by an initial specification failure to locate the FRAMESET element in HEAD. The MSIE interpretation (NOFRAMES content is renderable only in a "No Frames" display context for the document) at least finds some use for what started as a fifth wheel. Usage according to the MSIE semantics "breaks" Netscape. (The historical absence, BTW, is actually restricted to the Mosaic-oid implementations. Ever since the FIG element in the HTML+ Discussion document there has been *some* notion of conditional inclusion based on principal and alternative semantics for an element, only some browsers never got a Round Tuit.) Arjun
Received on Thursday, 5 June 1997 13:53:29 UTC