W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2009

Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong"

From: Edward O'Connor <hober0@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 11:25:06 -0800
Message-ID: <3b31caf90902161125y7f62202v8d874eda372d325f@mail.gmail.com>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
> HTML5 isn't being designed for incorporation in arbitrary generic XML
> compound documents in any case.

I think you're missing the most important XML compound document use
case: syndication, namely, the use of XHTML within Atom's text
constructs. As a content author, I intend my content for the Web, and
don't intend to write different markup for my site as for my feeds.
Thus, I plan to use XHTML5, not XHTML2, inside atom:content etc.

Ultimately, there's nothing for this working group to do--the solution
to the problem is for the XHTML2 working group to seriously pursue a
language rebranding effort (including, but not limited to, changing
their language's name & namespace) as envisioned in the W3C press
release of March 2007[1]:

> Those design choices have led to XHTML 2.0 having an identity distinct
> from HTML. With the chartering of the XHTML 2 Working Group, W3C will
> continue its technical work on the language at the same time it
> considers rebranding the technology to clarify its independence and
> value in the marketplace.


1. http://www.w3.org/2007/03/html-pressrelease
Received on Monday, 16 February 2009 19:25:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:31 GMT