I second the recommendation. Note that his work is cited from the HTML
home page at W3C.
If only we had a decent annotation/SOAP/review mechanism...
(see the Annotation working group under Collaboration at the W3C
site if you're interested... [if you follow up on this topic,
please change the subject line])
>Of course, like all we writers about this stuff, he was aiming at a very
>rapidly-moving target so it's not perfect.
He keeps it amazingly up to date. I'm encouraging him to continue to
do so. We're trying to work out some "W3C Endorsed!" logo or
something that he can display as a token compensation for his work.
By the way... if somebody were to write a really good intro to HTML
(along the lines of NCSA's, but more up to date), we might endorse
that as well. I doubt we could pay for it, but you'd probably be
able to scare up publishing royalties somewhere.
>Here's the reality. If you were to build a browser, you'd be the nerd who did
>all the work and had none of the power. All those decisions would be made for
>you by financial officers, attorneys, VPs of Marketing, 18-year old advertisin
>"executives" and pollsters.
Chuckle. That's exacly the realization that led me to take a
job at W3C in stead of some vendor, despite the pay scale