Re: Reality Check for HTML 2 RFC

• Mail folder: html-archive
• Next message: CN=Bruce Kahn/O=Iris@IRIS: "DTD Level 2 nit"
• Previous message: Jay Glicksman: "Re: Reality Check for HTML 2 RFC "
• Maybe in reply to: Eric W. Sink: "Reality Check for HTML 2 RFC"

Date: Wed, 5 Oct 94 14:29:19 EDT
Message-id: <199410051828.OAA02985@ws02-00.rsch.oclc.org>
Reply-To: weibel@oclc.org
Originator: html-wg@oclc.org
Sender: html-wg@oclc.org
Precedence: bulk
From: weibel@oclc.org
To: Multiple recipients of list <html-wg@oclc.org>
Subject: Re: Reality Check for HTML 2 RFC
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: HTML Working Group (Private)

I agree with Dan... The explanatory part of the HTML 2.0 spec 
is an important part of communicating the standard.

Does it make sense to rewrite it to make it simpler to express
in plaintext?  I'm willing to take a shot at it...

stu