- From: Abigail <abigail@fnx.com>
- Date: Sun, 13 Apr 1997 13:31:55 -0400 (EDT)
- To: galactus@htmlhelp.com (Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet)
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
You, Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet, wrote: ++ ++ In article <199704130734.DAA13692@fnx.com>, ++ abigail@fnx.com (Abigail) wrote: ++ > I think 2.3 would have been a much better number. ++ ++ Certainly. But the marketing guys wouldn't have accepted that. "We ++ already do advanced HTML 3.0 things (like frames!), so why would we ++ advertise that we support oldfashioned stuff?" I don't care much about the marketing guys.... ++ > BTW, you can still use <person>, <abbrev>, <acronym>. It degrades ++ > gracefully on non-HTML 3.0 browsers. ++ ++ But doesn't validate. :-( "Doesn't validate" is not a proper statement. "Doesn't validate against DTD X" is. If you use the HTML 3.0 DTD, it will validate. It will validate with <URL:http://www.ny.fnx.com/abigail/abigail.dtd> as well. And I assume it will validate with "it's all in here" HTMLPro DTD as well. Abigail
Received on Sunday, 13 April 1997 13:31:55 UTC