>As a result, I think that any ``2.1''-isms need to be evaluated with
>a: are there existing implementations?
>b: do the existing implementations have a common working subset?
>c: are documents using new features rendered acceptably in existing,
> actual browsers?
>d: are the changes such that all existing valid HTML documents will
>remain valid?
>e: do the changes follow the ruls & conventions that apply (e.g. SGML,
>but also IETF RFCs where they apply)?
.
>The file upload gets (no, n/a, ?, yes, yes) as far as I understand it.
I would say file upload gets (no, n/a, yes, yes, yes). The default value
of the TYPE attribute in the INPUT element is 'text'. Browsers that can't
give the user a file selection dialog box will just give the user a text
field. I believe this is acceptable rendering.
Also, the answer to question a. for file upload is 'yes' if you consider
that there is a publicly available sample implementation (on Mosaic for
X) stored in EIT's ftp server, but I don't know if any browser
implementors have actually picked it up and put it in their browsers.
Ernesto