- From: Brian Kelly <lisbk@ukoln.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 15:25:11 +0000 (GMT)
- To: Paul Prescod <papresco@calum.csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
- cc: Dave Carter <dxc@ast.cam.ac.uk>, www-html@w3.org
On Thu, 27 Mar 1997, Paul Prescod wrote:
> > Technically correct, but if you want to be pedantic no version of HTML
> > is standard since none has been endorsed by ISO. HTML 2.0 is an IETF
> > RFC, which is the nearest we will ever get.
>
> ISO is not the only standardization body. I read somewhere that the IETF was
> in some sense "recognized" by ISO, but that was in "media" and thus
> unreliable. I would be interested in clarifications by those in the know.
>
> Paul Prescod
The relationship between W3C, IETF and other standards bodies (ISO, ITU,
etc) was discussed at the W3C Advisory Committee meting in London in
January.
Harald T. Alvestrand (IETF) described the ways in which standards bodies
could work with each other:
o Work in parallel (this confuses the marketplace)
o One works, the other references (Workable when impact on other is low)
o One works, the other publishes (Has been done before (RARE RTRs, PNG)
o One works, the other facilitates (Requires high degree of common goals.
Helper must submit to owner's procedure. Requires explicit
coordination).
The impression I received from the meeting was a willingness for the IETF
and W3C to work together.
Information on ISO work on HTML is available at
http://www.ornl.gov/sgml/wg8/document/1901.htm
Note the comment "The editors have sought to avoid any gratuitous
imcompatibilities between ISO-HTML and HTML 2.0/3.2."
Brian Kelly
------------------------------------------------------
Brian Kelly, UK Web Focus
UKOLN, University of Bath, BATH, England, BA2 7AY
Email: B.Kelly@ukoln.ac.uk URL: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/
Phone: 01225 323943 FAX: 01225 826838
Received on Thursday, 27 March 1997 10:28:19 UTC