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

Re: The HTML Element

From: Arthur Wiebe <webmaster@awiebe.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2003 20:31:22 -0400
Message-ID: <3EED0FDA.8090009@awiebe.com>
To: Simon Jessey <simon@jessey.net>, www-html@w3.org
Simon Jessey wrote:

>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Henri Sivonen" <hsivonen@iki.fi>
>Subject: Re: The HTML Element
>
>  
>
>>>XHTML 1.0 has to use html to allow HTML user agents to use it.
>>>      
>>>
>>XHTML2 has no such limitation and could very well use "xhtml" as the
>>root element GI.
>>    
>>
>
>
>I would argue that changing the root element to "xhtml" for XHTML 2.0 would
>be an excellent idea, because it would help to discourage authors from
>writing a mixture of HTML and XHTML 2.0. Such hybrid documents would be that
>last thing we would want, as it would most likey lead to user agents that
>would try to make sense of them. I see XHTML 2.0 very much as an alternative
>to XHTML 1.0, indeed I would consider renaming it to avoid confusion. How
>about HXML or HTXML or AML (as Jeffrey Zeldman suggested)?
>
>Simon Jessey
>
>w: http://jessey.net/blog/
>e: simon@jessey.net
>
>
>  
>
I'd say it should be xhtml. Not HXML, HTXML, or AML because it's XHTML. 
Using one of the others would be just like it being html in a sense.
<Arthur/>
Received on Sunday, 15 June 2003 20:31:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:55 GMT