- From: Daniel W. Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 03:01:35 -0400
- To: galactus@stack.urc.tue.nl (Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet)
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
In message <ihXxx4uYORpG089yn@stack.urc.tue.nl>, Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet w rites: > >Again, the idea is that HTML 3.2 *describes current practice* rather >than sets new standards. New proposed tags will be in Cougar, HTML >3.[censored] if I understand it correctly. Yikes! Folks are already assinging a new version number, based not on an internet draft, not on a DTD, but on a rumor of a code name! After the fiasco with HTML 3.0, the main rule for choosing HTML version numbers is to choose ther version number AFTER the set of features has solidified. So if any particular version number gets used a lot in public forums before a spec is issued and stable, you can bet that we'll skip right past it and choose another one. Dan
Received on Sunday, 23 June 1996 03:01:50 UTC