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

Re: XHTML 1.0 = HTML 5.0? (was Re: XHTML 2.0 considered harmful)

From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 06:56:05 +0000 (GMT)
Message-Id: <200301150656.h0F6u5Y01883@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
To: www-html@w3.org


> impression that XHTML 1.0 was equivalent to HTML 5.0, but had a fancy name 

It would be more like 4.02, as the intention was not to make changes
other than those forced by XML.

Received on Wednesday, 15 January 2003 01:56:10 GMT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: David Woolley: "Re: (too) special markup (was: Re: XHTML 2.0 considered harmful)"
Previous message: David Woolley: "Re: XHTML 2.0 considered harmful"
In reply to: Devon Y.: "XHTML 1.0 = HTML 5.0? (was Re: XHTML 2.0 considered harmful)"

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
Help: [ How to use the archives ] [ Search in the archives ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:49:30 GMT