- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 07:01:13 +0200
- To: Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>
- CC: Jeff Schiller <codedread@gmail.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Chris Wilson wrote: > ... > [2] I would not say "XHTML is the wrong approach," per se - I am recognizing the realities of both deploying XHTML, given that it is not supported in current versions of IE and the adoption rates put that several years out at best, and the reality of the obvious lack of belief from the other browser and content representatives that XHTML is a good way to deliver content. I would say, in short, "XHTML might be a right way to deliver this some of the time; particularly in the future. It's not really deployable in most situations today. > ... Any new solution for the the extensibility problem would need to be deployed as well, so XHTML at least has the giant advantage of working in 3 out of 4 user agents *now* (and, in some locales, for over 50% of the audience). I understand that there are other reasons why people would still not like XHTML, so an alternative syntax for the HTML serialization would be needed. But it would be really great if the IE-doesn't-understand-XHTML roadblock could be removed. BR, Julian
Received on Saturday, 2 August 2008 05:01:58 UTC