> Folks, this is an interesting discussion, but in the interest of
> actually getting HTML 2.0 out before the San Jose meeting, I'll
> encourage you all to reserve "html-wg@oclc.org" to discussion of
> features that are either in or not in the specification.
>
> www-talk might be a useful forum for discussing whether 'HTML'
should
> be based on 'SGML' and the features or lacunae of it.
Thanks Larry -- I agree. Much as I feel responsable for basing HTML
on SGML in the first place :-{ I feel this group's business is to
define HTML in terms of SGML while using any tricks one can to leave
it as clean as possble, so that in fact it also happens to be
parsable by something which is not SGMLS.
Tim