Re: HTML 2.0 reconstruction done

Daniel Glazman (Daniel.Glazman@der.edf.fr)
Mon, 3 Apr 95 08:52:59 EDT

In message <199503311948.LAA00432@storm.mcom.com> 31 Mar 95 15:13:59, ebina@netscape.com wrote:

>
> murray@sco.COM says:
> > You may choose to ignore the SGML standard. That is your right.
> > User agents are free to do whatever they want, this
> > working group is not responsible for creating a spec
> > for HTML user agents.
>
> What exactly is the working group creating a spec for then, and who do they
> think they are creating it for?
>
> I thought this group was originally created as an IETF group to turn HTML
> into a standard to be used by internet user agents. Cetainly most of the
> messages written lately look like this is a group whose task is to load
> HTML down with as much SGML legalisms as possible so that any implementation
> of it will be so slow as to be unacceptable for use by internet user agents,
> and impossible to understand by anyone who hasn't bought a full SGML
> editing environment.

This group is trying to design a SGML application called HTML. HTML
currently suffers from a lack of SGML legalisms. I fully disapprove of
any step towards a "minimization" (not in the SGML meaning) of HTML *just*
in order to make things faster, simpler and writeable-by-hand....
I clearly see the speed argument for WWW browsers as a real problem.
But I also see parsers' integration in WWW tools as something highly
desirable for many reasons. Once again, YASP, its speed, and its simple API
are net-available...

Some DTDs around the planet are much more complex than HTML and are
used by people with no SGML knowledge at all. Do people using Word know
RTF ????

</Daniel>