W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2010

Re: Notes on the draft polyglot document Polyglot document

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 01:20:10 +0100
Message-ID: <4C102FBA.2030203@webr3.org>
To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
CC: Karl Dubost <karl@la-grange.net>, Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, TAG List <www-tag@w3.org>
Personally I don't see what's wrong with the term 'Polyglot', but 
following the thread thus far I'd suggest that 'mixed language' is as 
close as you'd get to a definition of Polyglot which most would 
understand, thus would put forward:

1: XML/HTML Polyglot Documents
2: XML/HTML Polyglot (Mixed Language) Documents
3: XML/HTML Mixed Language Documents

Best,

Nathan

David Booth wrote:
> Or perhaps "inter-compatible"?
> 
> On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 19:43 -0400, Karl Dubost wrote:
>> Le 9 juin 2010 à 08:49, Paul Libbrecht a écrit :
>>> If I dare, the name polyglot does have a multicultural connotation
>> which only insiders that know that HTML and XHTML are two different
>> "cultures" can understand ;-).
>>
>>
>> s/polyglot/versatile/ ?
Received on Thursday, 10 June 2010 00:21:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:09 GMT