- 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