W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > December 2003

Re: a recommendation - Received on Thursday, 18 April 2002 14:01:42 EDT

From: Christian Wolfgang Hujer <Christian.Hujer@itcqis.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 00:42:53 +0100
To: ernestcline@mindspring.com
Cc: www-html@w3.org
Message-Id: <200312040043.07176.Christian.Hujer@itcqis.com>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Ernest,

Am Mittwoch, 3. Dezember 2003 21:57 schrieb Ernest Cline:
> > [Original Message]
> > From: Christian Wolfgang Hujer <Christian.Hujer@itcqis.com>
> >
> > And believe me, as soon as there's a Content-Type and a
> > User Agent for XHTML 2.0, I will use it.
>
> Why?
Because XHTML 2.0 provides nice features for authors.
I especially like <h/> and <section/>, but also <nl/>.

> The biggest hurdle  that XHTML 2 faces is that there is that
> for most people it does nothing that cannot be done with
> XHTML 1.1 or even HTML 4.01.
For me I see it's easier to transform XHTML 2.0 to something different than 
XHTML 1.1.
And HTML 4.01 cannot be transformed with XSLT at all.

>  Unless an author feels
> a need to use XForms or XEvents, the only reason I see
> in the present draft for using XHTML 2 is to make techies
> such as ourselves feel good.
Oh, I see more reasons, not especially for XHTML 2, but at least for XHTML in 
general:
* SMIL
* SVG
* MathML

>  Modest tweaks and the
> <nl> element are not sufficient IMO to warrant using
> XHTML 2 when using XHTML 1.1 or HTML4.01 (sans
> presentational elements such as <i> of course) can do
> the job and can be understood by a wider variety of
> user agents.
Oh, using XHTML 2.0 doesn't mean I will discontinue elder versions.
With XSLT and Ant, it will be virtually no extra work to code in XHTML 2.0 and 
in parallel provide two more versions, one in XHTML 1.1 and one in HTML 4.01, 
for outdated user agents.

Transforming a <nl/> back to XHTML 1.1 and elder won't be easy, but that's a 
work required only once.

>  I still default to using HTML 4.01unless
> I need one of the features of XHTML or am mixing
> in some other XML specification.
I use XHTML 1.1 or XHTML Basic, depending on the site, and transform it to 
both, XHTML 1.1 and HTML 4.01.

> XHTML2 may be a tighter spec than XHTML1 or
> HTML, but I can achieve tightness on mine own by
> simply using a subset of the existing specs.
That's true.

> Indeed,
> the subset of HTML 4.01 that I use is almost
> XHTML 1.1except for using lang instead of
> xml:lang and the lack of ending /'s on empty elements.
I also sometimes extend XHTML using my own modules defining my own attributes 
or elements and then transform it to XHTML 1.1 and HTML 4.01, often mixed 
with PHP, Perl or JSP.
It makes authoring much easier.


Bye
- -- 
ITCQIS GmbH
Christian Wolfgang Hujer
Geschäftsführender Gesellschafter (Shareholding CEO)
E-Mail: Christian.Hujer@itcqis.com
WWW: http://www.itcqis.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2-rc1-SuSE (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/znT9zu6h7O/MKZkRAj0EAJ9jYvoEI2poZO9N3V8Ovcdqg7DF/QCeKR0N
wJ6fDYHBUcC0IzDwR/fZ2Tg=
=gRjP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:46:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:59 GMT