- From: Joe English <joe@trystero.art.com>
- Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 10:08:18 PDT
- To: www-html@w3.org
- Cc: ehood@isogen.com
Earl Hood <ehood@isogen.com> wrote: > The Cougar DTD is lacking markup declarations for frame markup. Hence > here is a modified version of the DTD that includes frames with associated > diff. A couple notes: > <![ %HTML.Deprecated [ > <!ENTITY % html.content "HEAD, BODY, PLAINTEXT?"> > ]]> > > <!ENTITY % html.content "HEAD, (BODY | FRAMESET)"> > > <!ELEMENT HTML O O (%html.content)> Since HTML.Deprecated is set by default to "INCLUDE", the first declaration for html.content takes precedence. Also, with: <!ELEMENT HTML O O (HEAD, (BODY | FRAMESET)) > it is no longer legal to omit the <BODY> start-tag, since the BODY element isn't contextually required anymore. If Cougar is to maintain backwards-compatibility with existing documents, FRAMESET documents will have to use a different document type. * * * As an aside, I don't think that "backwards compatibility with existing documents" is a worthwhile design goal for Cougar; that goal is already served by the HTML 2.0 and HTML 3.2 DTDs. A more important goal for HTML 3.N>2 would IMO be trying to ensure forward-compatibility with later versions of the standard. This woud entail, among other things, mandating start- and end-tags for HEAD and BODY, and getting rid of HTML.Deprecated. Any thoughts? --Joe English joe@art.com
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 1996 13:08:48 UTC