W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > January 2000

Re: XHTMLINATLA

From: Nir Dagan <nir@nirdagan.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 11:37:11 -0500
Message-Id: <200001251634.LAA16328@vega.brown.edu>
To: www-html@w3.org
At 07:58 AM 1/25/00 -0800, Todd Fahrner wrote:
>At 1:15 AM -0800 1/25/00, Walter Ian Kaye wrote:
>>"XHTML" feels too long for an unpronounceable acronym.
>>Is it just me?
>>
>>Maybe "XHML" or "HXML" or "XHL" or "HML"...
>
>How about XTLA - really pushes the "generically extensible" idea.
>

XHML, HXML XHL HML ommits the T (text). This is like saying you can mark 
anything with it. However XHTML esssentially marks up textual information 
(that is it doesn't markup chemical reactions or music, for example). 
XTLA doesn't mention markup. (and I'm not sure what the T stands for)

The major difference between HTML and XHTML is the formulation in XML of
the latter. 
Thus use: TXML "Text (using) XML"
or maybe XMLT "XML (application to mark) Text" 
In both the acronym XML is kept intact, thus pushing the generic
extensibility idea.
I prefer TXML. It is easyer to pronounce.

TXML (or XMLT) does not have the "Hyper" explicitly, but all XML
applications "hyper"
with XLink. 

Regards,
Nir.
 
===================================
Nir Dagan
Assistant Professor of Economics
Brown University 
Providence, RI
USA

http://www.nirdagan.com
mailto:nir@nirdagan.com
tel:+1-401-863-2145
Received on Tuesday, 25 January 2000 11:34:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:41 GMT