Re: Re HMML?

Marc Andreessen (
Wed, 26 May 93 00:25:52 -0500

Dale Dougherty writes:
> >My main objective is backwards compatibility with existing HTML.
> >The change to the container model shouldn't effect such documents.
> >Another objective is
> I'd like to see some discussion about HMML being backwards
> compatible with HTML. I think it's a mistake to set that up as a
> design objective. It also raises questions about how WWW parsers
> are going to work in the future. I would prefer to see HTML as a
> frozen thing; and HMML as the next generation. HMML documents
> should identify themselves using a document type declaration and
> parsers should look for this information.
> Once HMML becomes available, new documents should conform to HMML,
> not HTML. Support for HTML continues for already existing
> documents.

I agree -- this is a good thing to discuss. I think HTML is
expendable if HMML can be better without having anything to do with
it. (Whether that's the case or not, I'm not sure. I'd guess it is.)