I seem to recognise this argument from a few months ago. I believe what came
out of it then was something like:
- browsers should follow the DTD and render DTD-compliant documents correctly
- browser behaviour for documents that do not conform to the DTD is undefined
- browser implementers should be allowed to interpret non-conformant
documents loosely so they can provide something that still looks OK
- authors should NOT use the browser as a DTD conformance testing tool
My own comments:
Marc and the NCSA team have done a great job implementing the HTML and HTML+
stuff. Mosaic was one of the first (if not _the_ first) to implement forms,
and allow people to actually try this stuff out before HTML+ is set in stone.
If you want to bash Mosaic, I didn't notice your browser...If you don't want
SGML in w3, then don't blame it on Mosaic.
rik.
-- Rik Harris - rik.harris@fcit.monash.edu.au +61 3 560-3265 (AH & ans.mach) +61 3 565-3227 (BH) Department of Robotics and Digital Technology, FCIT, Clayton Campus, Monash University, Australia http://www.vifp.monash.edu.au/people/rik.html