CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_ Reported by Eric Sink/Spyglass, Inc. Minutes of the HyperText Markup Language Working Group (HTML) [All references to a specific page number in Dave Raggett's HTML 3.0 proposal are in fact references to the version dated March 28, 1995.] It was agreed that Dan Connolly would chair the week's meetings of the HTML Working Group. Navigational Aids for HTML 3.0 Dave Raggett presented an overview of navigational aids for HTML 3.0, to extend an HTML user agent by adding active icons to the toolbar. (See HTML 3.0, page 19.) The proposal is to continue to use the element in combination with a registered set of REL and REV attribute names. It would be left up to the user agent or a style sheet to determine how/if to present or render these navigational aids. Issues: o The REL and REV attribute semantics are not intuitive. A clearer description of the meaning of a relationships in either direction must be set out in the proposal. This description must coincide with current practice and not break backward compatibility. o The list of name tokens in the proposal conflicts with current usage, reference should be made to existing implementations to avoid backward incompatibility. [Specifically, SCO uses ``next,'' ``previous,'' ``contents,'' ``index,'' ``navigate.'' Note that these are all lower-case names. The semantics of REL are ``what the target document is in relation to the current document.'' In SCO's document, ``contents'' means ``table of contents.''] o Name tokens should not be mixed case. In general, lower case name tokens are preferred. A Proposed Element Dave Raggett presented an overview of a proposed element, which would occur at the top of the body element, contain body text, and would typically remain persistent at the top of a user agent's window. o Should be in or ? Arguments were presented for both views. o Should banner be specified via the mechanism with REL=``banner''? o Should have position attributes to provide for persistent banners at left, right, top, and bottom of a user agent window? File Upload Proposal There were no comments on the file upload proposal from Larry Masinter. Multi-Part Forms There was some discussion of ``Multi-part forms.'' One issue is that MIME type is not registered. Someone commented that it is ``stable, don't break it.'' Another comment was that it is ``dangerous to do backward incompatible.'' Client Side Image Maps Client side image maps were mentioned but there were no comments from the floor. Scripting Scripting, according to Dan, is out of scope for HTML. The group did not uniformly agree. Dan asserts that scripting on the WWW is ``early and experimental.'' Others disagreed -- Dan recants. Dan explains a bit about HotJava and promises to post the following URL to the list: http://java.sun.com/ The HTML 3.0 Proposal for Tables Dave Raggett reviewed the HTML 3.0 proposal for tables. o Table consists of rows which contain cells. Captions may be positioned with attributes. o There are two types of cells: head and data (TH and TD). Cells should not overlap, but if they do, the result is implementation-defined. o Dave explained how TH is used to identify cells which are heading cells, and that the CLASS attribute could also be used to identify a complete row as a heading row. o Jon or Terry pointed out a potential need for persistent left or right stub-head columns. o Dave explained that the table model meets the need for addressability of data in a table. o Murray asserted need for table head and foot, and closer compatibility with CALS model. Head and foot could be presented in persistent areas on screen or by having scrollable table. o Dave demurred. Jon pointed out that the burden of proof is on the unproven HTML 3.0 table model. o Yuri asserted that the existing model could meet everybody's needs with minor adjustments. The biggest issue seemed to be: colspec attribute vs. elements adding and elements nested tables allowed in HTML 3.0 proposal Dan and Tim suggest the need for a break out meeting to discuss and resolve this issue and report back to the meeting on the following day. A brief report of that breakout meeting is included later in these minutes. Math Fragment Dave presented an overview of the math fragment of the HTML 3.0 proposal. Issues: o Math fonts. Dave proposes a 98% solution which requires the specification of a 256-character set of math symbols. A mechanism for downloading fonts over the net may solve the remaining 2%. o A liaison with the American Mathematical Society is called for. Proposal for Style Sheets Dave presented an overview of the HTML 3.0 proposal for style sheets. Insists on clean separation between style and structure.