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

Re: Advance Publication of Modularization of XHTML CR document

From: Jan Roland Eriksson <jrexon@newsguy.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 02:26:45 +0200
To: <www-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <k17qtscl4598kffpphar5d9u9cmc3d160a@4ax.com>
[following a from me agreed upon intention of how a mailing
 list should work, this is posted to the list only.
 Stealth mails resulting from this will go unanswered]

On Thu, 5 Oct 2000 14:18:12 -0400, "Jelks Cabaniss" <jelks@jelks.nu>
wrote:

>Dave Raggett wrote:
>> Many thanks for your feedback. I will do my best to
>> ensure that the specs are as clear as possible...

>There really needs to be a section devoted to authors
>and how they would go about implementing Modularization.
>Something like "Here is an HTML 4 Transitional document,
>and here is how you would recast it as XHTML 1.1.

Some text outlining that idea would be welcome of course, but look at
where the www is going in practical terms. It's hard to admit but, "they
don't care" as long as "they get the cash flow they expect".

(and who do you think is the ruler of that game?)

Personally I see now reason at all as to why HTML had to be "re casted"
into a "new method" of markup (unless it's done as an SGML training
session for those who need that)

A short peek (for anyone interested) into comp.text.xml will reveal a
total disorder. Activities are presented as "new" from what was good
technical knowledge years ago.

Data markup is not rocket science really, but bandwagons can easily
change that view, especially when the prospect of more dollars is
allowed into it all.

-- 
Jan Roland Eriksson <jrexon@newsguy.com>
<URL:http://member.newsguy.com/%7Ejrexon/>
Received on Thursday, 5 October 2000 20:26:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:44 GMT