Re: More on XHTML as text/html

On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Christopher Hoess wrote:
> 
> 2) Hixie, I'm not sure why you assert that "one of the primary goals of 
> XML's development" was to ensure that documents are valid. One of the 
> important things WebSGML/XML achieved, it seems to me, is decoupling 
> well-formedness from validity, so that one doesn't need to build a 
> full-blown content model in order to parse an XML document.

My bad. s/valid/well-formed/.


> My personal perspective on the issue is that since namespaces are verboten 
> in text/html, there is, as Hixie says, really nothing in XHTML-as-
> text/html that you can't get from HTML 4.01. And XHTML adds the additional 
> burden of a number of compatibility guidelines, compliance with which I 
> can't determine through validation. In general, it seems like an exercise 
> in futility and buzzword-compliance. (What was that about chasing after 
> bleeding edge technologies that don't solve real world problems?)

Hear hear!

-- 
Ian Hickson                                      )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
"meow"                                          /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
http://index.hixie.ch/                         `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'