Absolutely.
I would like to clarify one point, however. I think you understand this,
but the wording of your response leaves just enough doubt that I'd like
to explicitly state this anyway.
> Style sheets provide
> a way of expanding the presentation info without complicating the semantic
> markup that is needed for true platform independence.
Recasting HTML 3.0 in terms of architectural forms will complicate the DTD
slightly (one new fixed attribute per element), and other specification
documents somewhat. However, it should have no effect whatsoever on the
markup of a conforming document. In terms of HTML 3.0 markup, it will not
complicate things at all --- it will be completely invisible.
This is not to discount your other comments. Keeping the spec and the DTD
simple may be compelling reasons to defer things until HTML 4.0. And style
sheets will offer more stylistic flexibility. I just want to make sure
there's no confusion.
Regards,
Glenn
> As editor for HTML+ (henceforth known as HTML 3.0) I am grateful for your
> contribution. The general feeling is that we want to constrain HTML from
> growing into an ever larger and more complex format. Style sheets provide
> a way of expanding the presentation info without complicating the semantic
> markup that is needed for true platform independence.
>
> Your suggestion to develop HTML into a suite of architectural forms has
> a lot of merit and will allow us a clean way of borrowing from HyTime.
> Right now our work is cut out for short term objectives, but I hope to
> surface for fresh air later this year. Perhaps we can consider these
> ideas for HTML 4.0?
> --
> Best wishes,
>
> Dave Raggett
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Hewlett Packard Laboratories email: dsr@hplb.hpl.hp.com
> Filton Road tel: +44 272 228046
> Stoke Gifford fax: +44 272 228003
> Bristol BS12 6QZ
> United Kingdom