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: Lachlan Hunt <lhunt07@netscape.net>
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 02:10:29 +1100
Message-ID: <3FD09FE4.2080104@netscape.net>
Cc: www-html@w3.org

ernestcline@mindspring.com wrote:

>While there are some nice features in XHTML2 (enough that as soon as there is widespread support of it as opposed to support by a single user agent as you stated, I will use it by default) There is nothing in the proposal that cannot be achieved by prudent use of XHTML 1.  <section>, <h>, and <nl> are all very nice, but they are not enough to cause the average user to wish to abandon XHTML1 or even HTML4 until XHTML2 is nearly as well supported as HTML4 is today.
>
  I actually somewhat disagree with you.  I think there is already so 
much added and changed that it would be worth updating.
  Aside from the <section> and <h> elements already stated which can be 
achieved using this:
<div class="section">
    <h1 class="h">heading 1</h1>
    <div class="section">
        <h2 class="h">heading 2</h2>
        <!-- etc... -->
    </div>
</div>
And the <nl> which can be somewhat achieved using <ul>, there are some 
things which cannot be so easily translated into XHTML1 equivalents.

  For example, the inclusion of XForms and XMLEvents are a big advantage 
for accessability, and other advantages over current html forms and 
script event handlers like @onclick, etc.  Despite the current lack of 
support for these relatively new technologies, by the time XHTML 2 is 
supported, these, hopefully, will be too.  However, there are also some 
good enhancements to the elements and attributes:

Improved Attribute Collections:
* The Hypertext attribute collection which can be specified
  on most (or all?) elements provides many useful advantages.
  Being able to make any element a hyperlink with @href or a
  citation with @cite

* The Edit attribute collection changing from the two elements,
  which now allows changed and moved to be specified, wheras
  only insert and delete can with the elements.

* The dir attribute in the Bi-di text collection, which
  replaces <bdo> which now also supports lro and rlo with ltr
  and rtl.

Improved Elements:
* <title> now suports inline elements, which perhaps might be
  good for specifing style such as aural styles so that the
  way a title is read by a speech synthesizer can be changed,
  or maybe visual UAs might support multi-coloured titles...
  who knows?

* The <blockcode> which can only be presentationally achieved
  using <pre> or maybe:
  <div>
      <code style="display:block"></code>
  </div>.

* The <l> element (personally, I think is one of the best
  elements I've seen for structure) which can be approximated
  using:
    <span class="line">text</span><br />,
  though not quite as semantic as <l>.
  (The <br> is needed  in XHTML1 for those UA that have
  style sheets disabled, or not supported to still see the
  line break, but the <span> allows for styling such as line
  numbers, or whatever.)

* The <object> element has been improved.  Reducing the number
  of object specific attributes from
  "archive, classid, codebase, codetype, data, declare, standby" to
  "archive, data, declare, content-length and Common",
  and replacing @standby with <standby>. makes it easier to use by being 
less ambiguous.

  Plus, there's the complete removal of all the presentational elements, 
(well, aside from <hr/> as well as <sub> and <sub>, though, personally, 
I don't think they do have some semantic meaning because it does 
actually mean something when  a subscript or superscript is read in a 
document, rather than just looking good.)

  So, IMO, although there are XHTML1 substitues for, there are quite a 
lot of changes in XHTML2 that will be worth taking advantage of as soon 
as possible.

CYA
...Lachy!
Received on Friday, 5 December 2003 10:10:36 GMT

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