Re: HTML 2.0 LAST CALL: *emph() and acknowledgements

David - Morris (dwm@shell.portal.com)
Thu, 1 Jun 95 13:18:31 EDT

These comments are based on the 2nd postscript version of 5/31.

My general impression is of much improvement ... if we could work
forever, it would be perfect...

A 'processing typo'?: In many places, I noticed strings like:
[Headings; *emph(H1) ... *emph(H6)]
(this exampie is on page 16 in section 4.2.1. The *ed 'verb'
may vary. Is this a missing macro or some such processing
instruction which can be easily fixed in one fell swoop or do
you need each such string listed?

Appendix B Acknowledgements... I would suggest deletion of the
'long' list of many people who contributed. Keep the special
acknowledgements for special effort (and perhaps there are one
or two more like Joe English for producing the .txt version for
example). In stead of the list, use the generic thanks to all
comment found in most technical books, etc.

It wasn't difficult for me to verify that the list was incomplete
and on refelection that several other active contributors are missing.
So my feeling is that it would be better to not list the whole
working group but rather just acknowledge the group.

How about:

Special thanks to the many active participants in the HTML
working group, too numerous to list individually, without
whom there would be no standards process and no standard.
That this document approaches its objective of carefully
converging a description of current practice and formalization
of HTML's relationship to SGML is a tribute to their
effort.

Dave Morris