Re: Feedback on XHTML 2.0 WD (20030131)

On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 02:26:04PM +0100, Herr Christian Wolfgang Hujer wrote:
| 4. XHTML 2.0 Document Type
| I'd like to see XHTML 2.0 also include MathML, not just XForms.
| (I know that's just a wish)

Would be nice. Perhaps, create two versions of XHTML2:

	* Standard
	* Enhanced

With "Enhanced" including support for SVG, MathML, etc. That way, people 
can include more appropriate XML-based markups in their documents 
without sacricifing that "Valid XHTML" button.
 
| About the footer suggestion: Though I like the idea, I'm against it because it 
| can be achieved with div and CSS.

Then why not get rid of <p/>, <blockquote/>, <abbr/>, <pre/>, <quote/>, 
etc... they can all be achieved with <div/>, <span/> and CSS.
 
| 7.3 The title element

I say get rid of the <title/> element altogether. Instead use <meta 
name="Title"> or <meta name="DC.Title">. After all, why should <title/> 
have its own element, but not other meta data?

| 8.9 headings
| I'd even not include h1-h6, not just deprecate them. Remove them. With section 
| and h, they're not required anymore.

Agreed. If you really want to preserve the old model as a fall-back, 
then include a "level" attribute.
 
| Currently, Mosaic, Netscape / Mozilla and lynx are the only user agents I know 
| that process link elements other than those linking to stylesheets.
| But link is one of the most useful HTML elements ever since, I think.

Links, eLinks, Opera 5 for Mac, Opera 7 for any platform, Googlebot...
 
-- 
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS | mailto:tobyink@goddamn.co.uk | pgp:0x6A2A7D39
    aim:inka80 | icq:6622880 | yahoo:tobyink | jabber:tobyink@a-message.de
            http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/ | "You've got spam!"
                             playing://(nothing)