Usability of HTML 2.0/3.0 specs -- element names in TOC

361 Lauritsen, x8379 (x8379)"
Thu, 25 May 95 09:21:15 EDT

I'd like to suggest that the element names themselves in each category, or
some symbolic representation, appear in the section titles and table of
contents. For example, in the HTML 3.0 hypertext draft, the table of contents
could read

6.The BODY Elements
1.Banners (<BANNER>)
2.Divisions (<DIV>)
3.Heading Elements (<Hn>)
4.Paragraphs (<P>)
5.Line Breaks (<BR>)
6.Horizontal Tabs (<TAB>)
7.Hypertext Links (<A>)
8.Overview of Character-Level Elements
Information Type Elements (<CITE>, <EM>, etc.)
Font Style Elements (<B>, <I>, etc.)
9.The IMG (Image) Element
10.Unordered Lists (<UL>)
11.Ordered Lists (<OL>)
12.Definition Lists (<DL>)
13.Figures (<FIG>)
14.Tables (<TABLE>)
15.Math -- missing entity names --
16.Horizontal Rules (<HR>)
17.Preformatted Text (<PRE>)
18.Admonishments (<NOTE>)
19.Footnotes (<FN>)
20.Block Quotes (<BQ>)
21.The ADDRESS Element
22.Fill-out Forms (<FORM>)

This would make it somewhat easier to refer to the spec when trying to
decipher an existing HTML document from a third party.

It would also be nice if a summary of the elements, similar to Earl Hood's
annotated DTD, were available as part of the specification, with a section
reference in the text version and (obviously) a hyperlink in the HTML version.

Does this seem like a reasonable addition to the content of the
Michael Kelsey