Comments of HTML+ draft

Tim Berners-Lee <>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 93 14:39:50 +0100
From: Tim Berners-Lee <>
Message-id: <>
Subject: Comments of HTML+ draft

A list of points

0.	Thanks for the very great effort.

1.	Editorial...

1.	The draft filename is unfortunate in that "plus" is
	missed out,
	and the name looks different from the html draft name
	I don't know what we do about that.  It is reasobal to miss
	out iiir as they are not involved with that yet but it is
	their area.  They can both go under the new nominal WG.

1.5	The document needs an index.  It is difficult, for example,
	to find the discussion of LANG on p6 and I never found a
	discussion of the INDEX attribute. (Comes from my
	reading in a order random.)

1.6	May I suggest as a question of style -- and an aid to
	convergence -- that you wrod the spec in a conventional
	way as a specification -- with "should" and "shall"
	to specify levels of imperitiveness?  The "could"s
	which are comments about how the spec should be changed
	should be compleetly separate -- like in a different font.
	That way one can say "I am happy with the spec as it stands
	at <date> except...".

2.	ISMAP attributes are in the FIG, IMG, etc.  I really want to
	make them obsolete as quickly as possible.

3.	Where is HR? Not in Appendix IV

4.	Why does INPUT have no ID? Does Name serve it's purpose - if
	so, tehn it should be "ID", else it ID should exist

5.	ISINDEX I would also like to see "obsolescenbt", with the
	use of LINK instead.

6.	LINK should have PRINT if A has PRINT.  LINK should also have

7.	I think you should be more precise about the entity names,
	rather than "most browers support".  Make two levels if you
	have to, but please define them.  Perhaps a minimum set and
	also a very large set.  For example, the upper part of
	a left brace is not necessarily the way to go for math...
	We want to be able to establish real poratability for
	HTMLplus conforming documents -- not postscript-like
	We can add to this recommendations for how to
	make extensions ina non-destructive way, as we always have.
8.	PRE no longer has "WIDTH". That stops HTML+ being a
	superset of HTML.

9.	If HTML+ is to be a superset of HTML, it musg include the 

	<HTML> element.  

10.	Entity names are case sensitive. Looks like the example
	&oacute;engus should be  &Oacute;engus on p5.

11.	Do we need ID on TITLE? Specify that the title is not
	part of the document contents.
12.	p32 -- what is a "conventional hypertext-based index"?

13.	p22: Yes, I think a separate METHOD attribute would
	be cleaner.  POST should be the default.
14.	10.1, p25:  next to last para. "In the near future..."
	This spec should not be limited. Insist on floats
	now.  It will be much more difficult later!!!

	10.2 p26:  The definitions of the formats for sending
	forms by HTTP, mail, etc., need to be more clear.

I forget exactly the dates of the Irish meeting, but hope it goes
well anyway.