Hi Kenny,
As you may have noticed in the examples I put up earlier, each html has a number of allowed attributes.
This mirrors quite closely the options you can set in tk. The macros I've defined so far actually provide a nice benefit (that doesn't seem to exist in any of the other html generation libraries) of validating your html. For example, if you tried to put a "fizzle" attribute on some element, you'd get an error whereas this would be perfectly acceptable in many other html generation libraries. I think that some of the Haskell ones do clever things with typing to achieve the same effect.
The drawback, as far as I can see is that this pollutes the namespace by adding a whole bunch of methods that do essentially the same thing. If someone wanted to use this library, many useful names like "onclick", and "href" would be snapped up already.
Is the solution just to make a short nickname, then people can just use the package qualified names for all the functions we export.
Cheers, Andy