Re: ICADD elements in HTML
"Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@hal.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 94 16:00:18 EDT
Message-id: <9409081958.AA00380@ulua.hal.com>
Reply-To: connolly@hal.com
Originator: html-wg@oclc.org
Sender: html-wg@oclc.org
Precedence: bulk
From: "Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@hal.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <html-wg@oclc.org>
Subject: Re: ICADD elements in HTML
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: HTML Working Group (Private)
In message <199409081944.MAA05255@rock>, Terry Allen writes:
>There seems to be consensus that adding the elements is the way
>to go;
I disagree. So much for consensus!
> so I say we might as well put them into 2.0 as wait for
>2.1.
I STRONGLY disagree. Show me three major browsers that support ICADD
documents, and I'll support a change to HTML 2.0.
> The documentation should make clear what their intended
>use is, and warn ordinary HTML users that their rendering may
>differ considerably from one WWW browser to another.
This would be a great disservice to the community.
Dan