- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 08 Mar 1997 22:43:21 -0600
- To: MegaZone <megazone@livingston.com>
- CC: www-html@w3.org
Just a point of order: MegaZone wrote: > > I'm no SGML wiz, so if I messed > up the DTD fragment please correct me. The DTD fragment helps -- at least for folks like myself who are used to reading them. But I feel I've given the impression that proposals that are not accompanied by an SGML DTD are unwelcome. While ultimately I think every proposal must have a DTD before it is finished, any fairly well researched and detailed proposal is welcome in order to start discussion. By "well researched," I mean that you've done a sort of "review of the literature" -- i.e. read the WWW FAQ, the archives of this list, the conference papers, internet drafts, etc.[1] A BNF grammar is a fine substitute for a DTD if you're more comfortable with that. Another option is to just give enough examples to make the proposal clear. I'm learning that (1) carefully crafting examples forces you to think clearly about your proposal, and (2) readers often pick up on concrete examples more easily than DTDs. > This would be used as follows: > > <SELECT NAME="testlist"> > <OPTION>first item > <NEST name="stuff"> ... By the way... I have to agree that nested SELECT controls are a missing wheel in the design of FORMs. Has anybody implemented anything like this proposal? I'd be surprised if nobody has. And another thing: checking SGML DTDs with nsgmls[2] is really very easy. I encourage folks to give it a whirl! [1] http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/MarkUp/Forums [2] http://www.jclark.com/sp.html -- Dan Connolly, W3C Architecture Domain Lead <connolly@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ PGP:EDF8 A8E4 F3BB 0F3C FD1B 7BE0 716C FF21
Received on Saturday, 8 March 1997 23:43:33 UTC