- From: Scott Bigham <dsb@CS.Duke.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 20:41:12 -0400 (EDT)
- To: www-html@w3.org
MegaZone <megazone@livingston.com> wrote: >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? Whatever happened to the idea of a modular DTD?[1] That could take care of the problem elegantly. Each recommendation would provide a DTD "module", and then the DTD for, say 3.2 plus style sheets plus Javascript would be: <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN" [ <!ENTITY % stylestuff PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Style Sheet Extensions//EN"> <!ENTITY % scriptstuff PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Javascript Extensions//EN"> %stylestuff; %scriptstuff; ]> or some "glue" DTD thrown together on the quick. >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...). It's right where it always was, at [2]. You're right, there doesn't appear to be a link to it at [3]. -sbigham [1] <URL:http://ogopogo.nttc.edu/spec/html/modular-dtd.html> [2] <URL:http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/MarkUp/Cougar/HTML.dtd> [3] <URL:http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/MarkUp/Cougar/>
Received on Wednesday, 16 April 1997 20:41:42 UTC