Re: ISO and HTML

> On  Wed, 02 Apr 1997 05:48:37 Paul Prescod wrote:
> >DIR and MENU have not found market acceptance >after several years. They
> >should not even be in HTML 3.2 which was >supposed to describe "current
> >practice."
> Am I wrong or is it a bad idea to remove DIR and MENU completely?
> The difference between DIR, MENU and normal ULists has always been
> its content.
> If you want to automatically evaluate documents and for example search for
> all docs containing DIRs or extract these DIRs, this job will be hard to
> fulfill if you just
> have ULs, where the tag says nothing about its content.
> That's why I think it has been the right choice to have these tags in
> Cougar (in my opinion
> not only for backwards compatibility).

I agree - I would like to see these tags remain.  It's especially
useful to know the author's intention (MENU vs another list) when 
trying to develop a stylesheet to display the content.

-Chad Yoshikawa

Finger me for my pgp public key
Today's random buzzword: digital m-bone

Received on Wednesday, 2 April 1997 18:43:00 UTC