Chris.Lilley@sophia.inria.fr said: > Since this is to be an experimental (forward looking) rather than > existing practice (backward looking) document, the fact that > something is not in HTML 3.2 is not a problem. Right you are - but since RFCs are permanent once published, I really *hate* references that end up pointing nowhere, like current references to HTML 3.0 do - and Cougar and the current HTML 3.2 draft are just that, drafts. Chris.Lilley@sophia.inria.fr said: > All links, or just the ones for which a button is appropriate? User's choice? This user thinks that links that the browser doesn't know about should be displayed by default somehow, but I'm not exactly a typical user... have fun - it would be great to see this doc published! HaraldReceived on Thursday, 17 October 1996 13:54:15 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 30 April 2020 16:20:26 UTC