Re: html5 syntax - why not use xml syntax?

On Jul 7, 2007, at 3:59 AM, Mynthon Gmail wrote:
> My idea is to have compatible syntax, but xhtml is xhtml with its  
> own parse and html is html with its own parser. Only syntax is  
> unified.

That does seem like the right thing to do for authoring conformance.  
I have a hard tim thinking of any cons for that. Of course there  
would still be HTML 4.0,1 HTML 4, HTML 3.2, etc. — all handled by the  
same HTML parser — along with HTML5. But its hard for me to think of  
downsides to just requiring of authors a very XML-like syntax for  
HTML5's non-SGML / non-XML serialization. We would still need to deal  
with issues of implied elements (e.g., <colgroup> and <tbody>) and  
perhaps some escaping issues when moving between XML and HTML5  
serializations.

What do other think about this proposal?

Take care,
Rob