W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2007

Re: Choosing name for XML serialization (Was: Re: HTML5 differences from HTML4 editor's draft (XHTML5 and XHTML2))

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 01:31:40 -0700
Message-Id: <2BA3B88E-1C24-4B49-A6E4-8B5681F8C667@apple.com>
Cc: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>, "Philip Taylor (Webmaster)" <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
To: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>


On Jun 22, 2007, at 1:02 AM, Jirka Kosek wrote:

> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
>>> I would imagine the reaction of the XHTML2 WG is more to the name
>>> XHTML5 that would have the effect (whether intended or not) of  
>>> making
>>> XHTML2 seem obsoleted. XHTML1.5 would get around that (while still
>>> providing a link to HTML something like java 1.2/ J2EE 2).
>>
>> I'd love to hear an official statement from the XHTML2 WG to that  
>> effect.
>
> Me too. But before asking we probably should make sure that members of
> out WG will be happy with XHTML1.5.

So long as the XHTML2 WG's official stance is that we shouldn't use  
the name "XHTML" at all, I prefer XHTML5 since it matches better with  
HTML5. I don't want to bend over backwards to compromise with a group  
that does not appear interested in compromise.

  - Maciej
Received on Friday, 22 June 2007 08:32:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:45 UTC