Re: comments on transclusion I-D

[Andrew Pam <xanni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ron Daniel Jr. wrote:
> First, the IETF no longer has an HTML working group. The W3C is now
> attempting to standardize HTML. Second, the W3C already has the
> "object" proposal which is what they are going to recommend for including
> various media and executable objects. I suggest you look at that
> proposal and see how to modify it to accomodate transclusions of
> textual resources.

That proposal is really intended for the inclusion of media types that can
be displayed in a rectangular display region.  Our proposal is intended to
permit the inline processing of HTML, including further layout transcluded
from other documents.  I still think it makes more sense to propose a new
tag - although I would be willing to consider <INCLUDE>, which was the tag
originally proposed for what is now <OBJECT>!

Share and enjoy,
		*** Xanni ***
-- 
mailto:xanni@xxxxxxxxxx                         Andrew Pam
http://www.xanadu.net/xanadu/                   Technical VP, Xanadu
http://www.glasswings.com.au/                   Technical Editor, Glass Wings
http://www.sericyb.com.au/sc/                   Manager, Serious Cybernetics
P.O. Box 26, East Melbourne VIC 8002 Australia  Phone +61 3 96511511