- From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 16:22:32 +0200
- To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, "Shane McCarron" <shane@aptest.com>
- Cc: "Richard Schwerdtfeger" <schwer@us.ibm.com>, "Karl Dubost" <karl@w3.org>, public-xhtml2@w3.org
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 11:21:49 +0200, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote: > I see. I'm standing by to see if that's the position of the > XHTML 2 WG. I'm offering to relay comments from the XHTML 2 WG > as a whole. Dan, The XHTML2 WG discussed this yesterday, and there was a strongly held opinion that the XML serialization of HTML5 should not be called XHTML5. The feeling was: 1. It would cause confusion (for instance, it is not the 5th version of XHTML, which is what it suggests given the other numberings of XHTML, but the XML version of HTML5). 2. Since XHTML refers to a family of modularized languages, and HTML5 does not use this framework, it would mislead. 3. There is no need to have two names for HTML5. Just talk about the XML serialization of HTML5 if the need arises. Best wishes, Steven
Received on Thursday, 21 June 2007 14:22:40 UTC