Re: HTML 2.0 spec editing

Daniel W. Connolly (
Thu, 25 Aug 94 16:59:38 EDT

In message <>, Eric W. Sink writes:
>I just got committments of resources for Spyglass to volunteer to take
>on the responsibilities for this work. This will *not* be a situation
>where the work will get done in my free time. We're willing to commit
>real live documentation and technical writing staff to the task.


>OK, I stepped forward. Now what?

I enumerated a list of action items and suggestions for how to
proceed in:
"Release of HTML 2.0 document for editing"
available at

among them...

>...the editors proceed in series, thusly:
> * download the release
> * edit it to taste
> * produce postscript and HTML (and eventually text) for review
> * send mail to, announcing the anonymous FTP location
> of the new version
> * The WG reviews it, and either:
> * your edits are approved and the next editor starts
> * your edits are deemed incomplete and you get another try, or
> * your edits are rejected and the next editor starts from the
> previous version

I have a vague recollection that you volunteered to do:

>* HTML/HTTP interaction section:
> Volunteers: Eric Sink <>

We (at least I) seem to be stuck on finding an editing format from which
we can easily produce text, postscript, and HTML. HTML itself is a good
candidate, but the tools are raw.

I have had one volunteer ((Alex Devries <>) to
convert the existing HTML to MS Word, and provide tools to convert
Word back to HTML. Peter Flynn seems interested in editing HTML and
converting to PS through TeX. The release includes a Frame
Book. Whatever works is fine by me.