- From: Jukka Korpela <jkorpela@cc.hut.fi>
- Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 11:13:44 +0300 (EET DST)
- To: www-html@w3.org
On Mon, 13 Apr 1998, Russell Steven Shawn O'Connor wrote: > It looks like ISO-HTML (ISO/IEC 15455:1998) is an actual ISO standard now. It may look like that, but it isn't. > <URL:http://woodworm.cs.uml.edu/%7Erprice/15445/FinalCD.html> Did you look at the date there? Well, I don't remember what exactly it means to write 1998-00-00 according to the ISO date standard, but it really suggests to me that the document isn't final yet. :-) A more official copy of the document seems to be at ftp://ftp.cs.tcd.ie/isohtml/FinalCD.html At the same site, you'll also find ftp://ftp.cs.tcd.ie/isohtml/19yy.html with a link to http://www.ornl.gov/sgml/wg8/document/1944.htm which contains information about the standardization process. But the real status of the document is revealed only to those enlightened souls who can speak fluent ISOese. My uneducated guess is that "CD" means here "Committee Draft". (I bet you thought it was Corps Diplomatique!) Trying something beyond guessing, I think the description of ISO standardization process at http://www.iso.ch/infoe/proc.html and in particular at ftp://ftp.iso.ch/pub/out/directives/en/dirp1.html suggests that despite the number 15455:1998 having been assigned, ISO specification for HTML is still at phase 3 in a system of phases 0 through 6. As regards to the content of the draft, it seems to have improved really. It even calls the language "HTML", not "ISO-HTML". And if I understand correctly, it is now pretty short, using HTML 4.0 specification as normative reference. I still can't see the beef: what's the point of using resources for defining a standard which is a subset of HTML 4.0 Strict? Yucca, http://www.hut.fi/u/jkorpela/
Received on Tuesday, 14 April 1998 04:13:47 UTC