- From: MegaZone <megazone@livingston.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 16:50:01 -0700 (PDT)
- To: www-style@w3.org, www-html@w3.org
Once upon a time Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet shaped the electrons to say... >The problem is that in a few months, we'd need HTML 3.4 to also add >support for Javascript hooks, and then perhaps 3.45 for netscape frames, >and so on.. I LIKE that idea though. When anythign that impacts the DTD becomes an official recommendation the DTD SHOULD be revved. I strongly feel there should always be an official W3C DTD that represents all recommendations to date. What is the sense of having seperate groups for different modules when it all ends up waiting on the HTML WG for their next rev? It shouldn't be a lot of work, and since DTDs don't get numbers until they are done it should have no impact on other fields. Hell, maybe just do a review once a month - if there are any new recommendations that month, rev the DTD. That way you don't rev it once a week if lots of small things get changed, etc. >Would it be too much asked to get an official Cougar DTD out _now_ >even though there still are things to work on? It would be nice - we did have a Wilbur DTD to work with that evolved. And there *was* a Cougar DTD out, I just can't seem to find it in the new structure (maybe they didn't link it...). -MZ -- Livingston Enterprises - Chair, Department of Interstitial Affairs Phone: 800-458-9966 510-426-0770 FAX: 510-426-8951 megazone@livingston.com For support requests: support@livingston.com <http://www.livingston.com/> Snail mail: 4464 Willow Road, Pleasanton, CA 94588
Received on Wednesday, 16 April 1997 19:51:50 UTC