On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Stu Weibel wrote:
>
>
> > Is a consensus now forming around the position that shoe-horning any more
> > functionality into the limits of what is possible within a single attribute
> > string in HTML is maybe not such a smart move?
>
> Lou raises an important point. There has always been a tension in
> these discussions between simplicity and the flexibility that enables
> more complex implementations.
>
> RFC #1 will outline the elements and the consensus on how to code
> unstructured elements in HTML. This is Lou's simple case.
> Nonetheless, I am still hopeful that we will be able to agree on a
> single, simple mechanism for adding a qualifier to an element's
> content string.
This is a good way to proceed. But note that it is rather important
that you specify how to get the basic information out of complex
data already in RFC #1. Whether this is "ignore the first pair
of parenteses in the CONTENT field" or whether it is "ignore
everything after the first period in the NAME field", is not
that important, but because a date formatted according to some
very specific rules still may serve very well as a free-text
date, it would be a great pity if software written to deal
with the simple case would choke if a qualifier is there.
Regards, Martin.
|