OK. How about:
|<p>The content of a DL element is a sequence of DT elements and/or DD
|elements, usually in pairs.
<p>The content of a DL element is a sequence of DT elements and/or DD
elements, usually in pairs.
> Under the Image description the ALT tag is described as:
>[...]I propose it be changed to be something like:
>
>ALT Optional alternative text, for use in non-graphical environments.
>Alternately the HTML user agent may display this text when it will not display
>
>the actual image.
How about this:
in the description of the IMG element:
|<p>HTML user agents may process the value of the <attr/ALT/ attribute
|as an alternative to processing the image resource indicated by the
|<attr/SRC/ attribute.
and in the attribute list:
<tli>ALT: text to use in place of the referenced image resource, for
example due to processing constraints or user preference.
>Also, since there was a URN attribute added to the Anchor element, is there a
>reason we do not do the same for the IMG element (apart from creating a
>documentation headache)?
Sorry, no HTML 2.0 design changes at this point. Propose it for HTML
2.1 or some such.
> On the same topic, since only a SRC attribute is required for an IMG element
>,
>shouldnt the description of ISMAP be changed to :
>
>ISMAP
> Optional attribute that indicates that the image is an image map (see
>section Image Maps).
That info is in the DTD. I took out most of the stuff that discussed
syntax in the whole "Document Structure" section. I don't really want
to start putting it back in.
I'm considering a sort of "how to read the DTD" appendix, but my favorite
idea at this point is to cite the TEI project's "Gentle Introduction to SGML":
ftp://www.ucc.ie/pub/sgml/p2sg.ps
> On the Character, Words, Paragraphs page
>(http://www.w3.org/hypertext/WWW/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_5.html) under the
>heading The ISO Latin 1 Character Repertoire is the sentence:
>
>The minimum character repertoire supported by all conforming HTML user agents
>is Latin Alphabet Nr. 1, or simply Latin-1.
>
> Since on most other previous pages you actually mentioned this as "ANSI/ISO
>8859-1", why not change the line to be:
The Latin-1 character repertoire is different from the ISO-8859-1 coded
character set. See the glossary.
>However under the description of LINK, there is no explicit mention of just ho
>w
>this should be done (ie: HREF or SRC). While it may be inferred that the HTML
>
>author should use <LINK HREF=..>, it would probably be more precise to just ad
>d
>a single line to the LINK description on
>http://www.w3.org/hypertext/WWW/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_4.html to just be
>explicit in this.
Agreed. How about:
<p>The <tag/LINK/ element represents a hyperlink (see <hdref
refid=hyperlink>). It has the same attributes as the <tag/A/ element
(see <hdref refid=a>).
<p>The <tag/LINK/ element is typically used to indicate authorship,
related indexes and glossaries, older or more recent versions,
stylesheets, document hierarchy etc.
>There is a minor mistake on the last line of the Image Maps description. It
>states:
>with the URI `http://host/cgi-bin/imagemap?0,0'.
Good catch.
>On the Forms page
>(http://www.w3.org/hypertext/WWW/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_7.html), the
>description of the FORM element no longer says what will happen if there is no
>
>SUBMIT (or INPUT TYPE=IMAGE) inputs on a form. In the past, this was
>explicitly a no-no but this appears to no longer be the case. When was this
>changed and why?
I dunno, really. What did it used to say? (and where? I'm looking at
old versions and I can't find it.)
>In the first paragraph under the heading FORM you wrote:
> The names are specified on the NAME attributes of form input elements, and
>the values are given by the user.
>
>Since there are hidden fields and 'default' values Id like to suggest you
>strike the last part or rephrase it [...]
Agreed. How about:
<p>A form is a template for a form data set and an associated method
and action URI. A form data set is a sequence of name/value pair
fields. The names are specified on the <attr/NAME/ attributes of form
input elements, and the values are given initial values by various
forms of markup and edited by the user. The resulting form data set is
used to access an information service as a function of the action and
method.
>The description of the TEXTAREA element is not consistant with the others in a
>
>few ways. Mainly it does not explictly list the attributes. I propose the
>entry be changed to:
>Text Area: TEXTAREA
>
>The TEXTAREA element represents a multi-line text field. Attrubutes are:
>COLS
> The number of visible columns to display for the text area, in characters.
>NAME
> Specifies the name of the form field.
>ROWS
> The number of visible rows to display for the text area, in characters.
Done.
>There is a typo on the first line of the 1st numbered paragraph under "The
>'application/x-www-form-urlencoded' Media Type" heading. The word characterss
>
>should only have one s.
Yep.
> In that same paragraph you wrote:
>
> Line breaks, as in multi-line textfield values, are represented as CR LF
>pairs, i.e. `%0D0A'
>
>Why wouldnt that be '%0D%0A' since the CR and LF are separate characters?
Yep.
Dan