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

Re: The point of XHTML 2

From: Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer <sebastian@dreamlab.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 23:44:44 +0200
Message-ID: <4680374C.3030404@dreamlab.net>
To: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
CC: Maurice Carey <maurice@thymeonline.com>, HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>

Well said, Chaals.

Cheers,

- Sebastian

Charles McCathieNevile schrieb:
>
> On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 20:05:20 +0200, Maurice Carey 
> <maurice@thymeonline.com> wrote:
>
>> If html5 is the official contination of html4.x and xhtml is an xml 
>> version of html4 and html5 will have an xml verion...why is there
>> still a completely separate XHTML2?
>
> In short, because there is a market for it. Some of the people who 
> take money to adapt content in various ways are big fans of XHTML 2.
>
>> Aren't all the major browsers members of this working group and 
>> pushed for html5 to be the official new version?
>
> Yes.
>
>> Won't that mean there'll likely not be anyone implementing xhtml2
>> when/if they ever finish writing their specs?
>
> No. There are people who implement XHTML 2 stuff already. It is just 
> that there is almost none of it on the open web, and there are 
> difficulties in implementing the two side by side, so there is not 
> much obvious motivation for a major browser vendor to implement XHTML 
> 2. (In practice one of the goals of XHTML 2 is to use more generic XML 
> technology. For example many of the important features of XHTML 2 
> already work in Opera, although not all of it - most notably we do not 
> implement Xforms so you need to use an extension if you rely on it).
>
> Cheers
>
> Chaals
>
> --  Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
>   hablo español  -  je parle français  -  jeg lærer norsk
> chaals@opera.com    Catch up: Speed Dial   http://opera.com
>
Received on Monday, 25 June 2007 21:44:35 UTC

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