Source: http://ksi.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/archives/HTML-WG/html-wg-94q4.messages/0565.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 01:48:43+00:00

Document:
Next message: Paul Burchard: "Re: Comments on HTML Spec - 2.0"
The comments in this letter are organized according to the sections in the draft specification.
"Simple structured documents with unlined graphics" should probably read "inlined".
This document seems intent on using the abbreviation "W3", but this preference over "WWW" is not followed consistently throughtout the document. Perhaps, "WWW" should be put in §8.
Implicit forward reference to "Level"
The use of "level"s precedes the explanation of what levels are. It might be good to introduce them briefly -- perhaps call them conformance levels and point to the explanation on page 16.
Redundant entry: "Blockquote" and "Quoted Material"
The <BLOCKQUOTE> element is given twice in §2.2. Perhaps the second entry should be omitted or reduced to "see Blockquote."
In §2.4 there is the comment "Not supported by Mosaic." The questions are: What is Mosaic? Why should we care? What if Mosaic decides to conform to Level 1?
The example in §2.8 contains "does/ul>" where it should probably read "does<ul>".
Section 3. seems to be the only place a different typeface is used for a URL.
In §3.12.4 the word "Professionnnal" is a misspelling.
Also in the example in §3.13.1, the apparently nonstandard ALIGN=CENTER attribute is shown in a P element.
Compare the titles of sections §3.14.3 and §3.15.3; and check with Mr. Goldfarb, who may have a strong opinion on the choice of adjective.
There seem to be quite a few incorrectly formed numeric character references in §3.15.3, i.e., with no # after the initial & character.
URI made the current list, but it's near relations didn't, when perhaps they should.
There is a rather odd page break in the explanation of "W3".

References: §8
 §2
 §2
 §2
 §3
 §3
 §3
 §3
 §3