- From: Bert Bos <bert@let.rug.nl>
- Date: Mon, 13 Jun 1994 19:28:02 +0200 (METDST)
- To: murray@sco.com (Murray Maloney)
- Cc: www-html@www0.cern.ch, bert@let.rug.nl
Murray Maloney writes:
|So, what is the story going to be? I think that
|we have to decide and commit right now. Either
|we are going to define HTML 2.0 and 3.0 as strictly
|conforming SGML DTDs and not provide trivial mechanisms
|for extending the language at the whim of information
|providers or browser developers, OR we are going to use
|SGML as a language of convenience for defining HTML 2.0
|and 3.0 and then provide simple but effective ways to
|formalize a mechanism for the extension of the language.
My vote (I thought this was agreed upon a long time ago...):
- Yes, documents in HTML versions >= 2.0 must be fully SGML compliant
- But browsers don't have to validate documents
Bert
--
__________________________________
/ _ Bert Bos <bert@let.rug.nl> |
() |/ \ Alfa-informatica, |
\ |\_/ Rijksuniversiteit Groningen |
\_____/| Postbus 716 |
| 9700 AS GRONINGEN |
| Nederland |
| http://tyr.let.rug.nl/~bert/ |
\__________________________________|
Received on Monday, 13 June 1994 19:28:07 UTC