* "I'd like to see HTML extended to include ..."
This is out of the scope of the 2.0 effort. We're trying
to be largely descriptive of current practice. www-talk
is still an OK forum for these comments... Dave Ragget
is always listening. But I have blinders on.
* "Here's a proposal for an HTML extension ... [proposed
spec extension included]"
I might have time to stick this in as a proposed feature.
No guarantees.
* "In http:...., you wrote XXX, which is wrong. What
actually happens is YYY"
I'll try to address these, but this format doesn't
save me any time -- it only creates work for me to do.
* "The http:.... node isn't quite right. Here's a replacement
[or diffs] and a few test cases to demonstrate the
subtleties"
Bingo. You're nearly guaranteed to get your comments in
if you submit them this way.
Thank you for your support.
Dan