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

(too) special markup (was: Re: XHTML 2.0 considered harmful)

From: Bertilo Wennergren <bertilow@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 16:10:19 +0100
To: www-html@w3.org
Message-Id: <200301141610.19467.bertilow@gmx.net>

Masayasu Ishikawa:

>  Bertilo Wennergren <bertilow@gmx.net> wrote:

>  > One of the main point so Mark's criticism is the surprising
>  > disappearance of the "cite" element. It was there in the 5 August
>  > draft, but was left out of the 11 December draft - with no
>  > explanation.

>  > Actually I suspect this was just a mistake. I think "cite" was not
>  > meant to be deleted.

>  Indeed it will be put back in the next draft.

Thanks for the clarification! But was it just an error, or was it 
intentionally removed? If so, why? And what were the reasons to put it 
back in?

If "cite" was seen as a bit to special for XHTML2, then what about the 
surprisingly rich vocabulary for computer code ("code", "kbd", "var" 
and whatever else...). What are those extremely special elements doing 
in a general document language? If "cite" is somehow on the edge of 
being to special, I can't really understand what "kbd" is doing in 
XHTML2 (nor what it was doing in any earlier version of HTML).

It seems to me that "kbd", "var" et.al should be confined to a module 
for marking up computer code, or even moved to a special XCODE markup 
language, since they're not even close to being rich enough for any 
practical use when marking up computer code.

-- 
Bertilo Wennergren <bertilow@gmx.net> <http://www.bertilow.com>
Received on Tuesday, 14 January 2003 10:10:31 GMT

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