W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > August 2002

Re: What kelvSYC thinks of XHTML 2.0

From: Mark Gallagher <mark@cyberfuddle.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 17:00:43 +1000
Message-ID: <3D575D1B.2040804@cyberfuddle.com>
To: kelvSYC <kelvsyc@shaw.ca>
CC: W3 HTML Mailing List <www-html@w3.org>

kelvSYC,

<snip />

> KelvSYC's point #3. The href attribute being global seems to be a sore spot
> to me.  For one thing, browsers don't render the stuff in <head>.  What
> would happen if you make <head href=""><!-- Head content here --></head>?

href doesn't necessarily have to be rendered.  Consider LINK, for 
example - even the few browsers that support it (Mosaic, Mozilla, 
Lynx... um, what else?), when coming across <link href="foo.html" 
type="text/html" rel="parent" />, will not immediately try to render 
foo.html - they'll just note that there is, in fact, a LINK that 
references that particular URI.

> KelvSYC's point #4. The line that separates structure and presentation seems
> to be very vague.  I know many will disagree when someone says that elements
> such as <abbr>, <quote>, <dfn> seems to be "excess baggage", and that
> something along the lines of CSS with <span class="SuchAndSuch"></span>
> should be used.  I personally don't think of them that way (being a person
> who likes to cut corners), but this definitive line should be cleared up.

I like <abbr>, <quote>, and <dfn> :-).  <acronym> (as already discussed 
in a similar thread here) is a little useless, however.

I'd like to see block-level versions of <code> and <samp>, by the way. 
Sorry to throw that in to your comments :-)

> KelvSYC's point #5. If <line> replaces <br/>, then <br/> should be kicked.
> I can't see why you want both.

Good point.

<snip />

> KelvSYC's point #7. I think that <ol> and <ul> should be put together.  If
> it's up to CSS to generate numbering/bulleting, then having two elements
> that are basically the same is "excess baggage".

There *is* a semantic difference between ordered and unordered lists. 
In <ol>, the order is specifically required to be the way it is - 
numbers or no numbers, it's not important.  With <ul>, the order simply 
happens to be the way it is by random chance - in theory, the UA could 
reorder the list, no worries.

Replacing <ol>, <ul>, and the new <nl> (or was it <ml>?) with something 
along the lines of <list type="ol/ul/nl"> might be an idea, if you want 
to reduce elements.

> KelvSYC's point #8. Why have a Presentation Module at all, seeing that it
> isn't meant to be backwards compatible and that XHTML is structure-only?

Indeed.

<snip />

> KelvSYC's question #2. Will someone please explain the difference between
> <div> and <p>?

<div> == block of text with no special meaning.  A <div> is any 
block-level grouping you need that has no semantically appropriate 
equivalent.

<p> == a paragraph.  Full stop, no other possible meaning.  That's it!

> KelvSYC's question #3. I take it that <br/> is illegal in <line>?

One would hope so.

<snip />

> KelvSYC's question #5. Is it possible to link to two pages at once (like one
> in the current window and one in the new one)?

*shudder*

<snip />

> KelvSYC's question #8. What would happen if someone mixed-and-matched XHTML
> 2.0 modules with XHTML 1.1 modules?

Worldwide chaos, followed by a light brunch.


-- 
Mark Gallagher
Desperately attempting - and failing - to stay on topic since 1999
fuddleriffic - http://cyberfuddle.com/
blog - http://cyberfuddle.com/infinitebabble/
Received on Monday, 12 August 2002 02:51:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:52 GMT