["Roy T. Fielding": HTML 2.0 spec and the META element]"Daniel W. Connolly" <email@example.com>
Subject: ["Roy T. Fielding": HTML 2.0 spec and the META element]
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 1994 11:13:27 -0500
From: "Daniel W. Connolly" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
------- Forwarded Message
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <email@example.com>
Subject: HTML 2.0 spec and the META element
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 08 Jun 1994 23:43:00 +0200."
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 1994 01:07:01 -0700
From: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@simplon.ICS.UCI.EDU>
> The first release of the HTML 2.0 specification materials is hereby
I'll start with a simple comment -- the following is wrong in
Obsolete head elements
A wrapper for an HTTP element
META cannot be an obsolete element because it has never existed in past
versions of HTML.
META should be a proposed element, with syntax and semantics fully
defined in the spec as per our prior discussion on www-html.
[I'm not surprised that it has not yet been included, I'm just making the
claim that it should be included as a proposed element before the 2.0 spec
can be considered complete].
Furthermore, all proposed elements should be fully defined in the spec
if their definition is known, and a "Proposed extensions to the DTD"
section should be included as well. If the definition is not known,
the purpose of the element should just be considered a "future direction"
and lumped together with other undefined stuff in some descriptive appendix.
[My editorial comment for the day]
...Roy Fielding ICS Grad Student, University of California, Irvine USA
<A HREF="http://www.ics.uci.edu/dir/grad/Software/fielding">About Roy</A>
------- End of Forwarded Message