Re: <a footnote="proposal"> 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. 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!


Received on Thursday, 17 October 1996 13:54:15 UTC