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

Re: Promotion of XHTML

From: Philip TAYLOR [PC336/H-XP] <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 15:04:30 +0000
Message-ID: <3E1EE0FE.2F15DF26@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
To: Etan Wexler <ewexler@stickdog.com>
CC: www-html@w3.org, "Russell O'Connor" <roconnor@Math.Berkeley.EDU>



Etan Wexler wrote:
> 
> Russell O'Connor wrote to <www-html@w3.org> on 7 January 2003 in
> "Promotion of XHTML"
> (<mid:Pine.SOL.4.44.0212301305130.18274-100000@blue3.math.berkeley.edu>):
> 
> > It blows my mind that the W3C seems to bury it's head in the sand about
> > the <br /> issues with ``compatibility'' between XHTML and HTML.  I just
> > don't understand what they were thinking when they came up with such
> > plainly false claims of compatibility.
> 
> The compatibility that exists in XHTML is with common user agents, not
> with HTML.
> 
> But, anyway, HTML has never been an SGML application in any practical
> way.  HTML was and is a fast and loose language, defined in part by
> Requests For Comments and Recommendations, but also by the
> functionaility of popular user agents.  

I totally disagree.  The functionality of popular user agents is
completely irrelevant to the /definition/ of HTML, which is 
defined solely by W3C standards; anything not meeting those
standards is not HTML but a text file containing angle brackets
and characters in some arbitrarily defined sequence.

Philip Taylor, RHBNC
Received on Friday, 10 January 2003 10:04:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:54 GMT