Re: HTML 2.0

Daniel W. Connolly (
Thu, 22 Sep 94 12:48:01 EDT

OK... now we have a plan that will get the train to the station
on time.

In message <>, Mike Knezovich writes:
>Surveying the group's mail prior to and since the Aug. 22 release, there
>actually don't appear to be that many specific changes (such as those just
>discussed re: LI attributes) to the technical content. There appears to
>have been more discussion about HTML 2.1 and 3.0 additions than HTML 2.0,
>which is currently irrelevant to this process.

Here's what I see as the outstanding DTD related issues, relative
to the Aug 22 version:

* 3 files or 1? (1 seems to be the way to go)

* What to use for public text ower?
(I think "-//IETF//DTD HTML//EN//2.0" will work)

* Get rid of Prescriptive and Obsolete distinctions
(1 valid objection has been raised. I feel
they should be kept in.)

* Prepare an HTML-specific version of the ISOlat1 entites
file, rather than referencing the public text

* Allow </A> to be ommitted? (I'd say: yes at this point)

I'll try to incorporate these changes and make the results available
next week some time.

>Our plans and schedule are thus:
>1. A text version available by October 10. We can mail (long) or make
>available by anon-FTP.

Please do both, so I can link to the FTP version from my "review
materials" page.

>5. After one more round of discussion of the text version, integration of
>changes and new versions available mid November for last call.

I can hardly wait!

Thanks for all the work.