W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > September 2004

Re: Tag / element question

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 19:21:35 -0400
Message-Id: <F9A12A66-10DB-11D9-AF97-000A95718F82@w3.org>
Cc: www-html@w3.org
To: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>

Le 18 sept. 2004, à 23:58, Orion Adrian a écrit :
> I would propose a lot of changes need to be made to really bring HTML
> tables into their own. I think they need a lot more capacity for
> semantic information and a structure that's less focused on
> presentation.

Which would lead to more complexity when some of the people are often 
reproaching XHTML 2.0 + XForms to be too complex, (which I don't 
believe)

If we really need an XML spreadsheet application, which might be 
perfectly valid and I'm pretty sure has been already started by Open 
Office community, we have to start a new WG for that and design XTable.

And with an object element we could call a spreadsheet to insert in 
XHTML document.

XHTML 2.0
	-> XForms
	-> SVG
	-> (RDF)
	-> XTable etc.

And it would look like a real compound document. I have seen that 
effort happening a long time ago before XML with OpenDoc (from 
Apple/IBM) where you could in a ClarisWorks document insert a real 
spreadsheet, a piece of email, a piece of web page. Or in the cell of a 
HTML document, a spreadsheet, etc. Cyberdog (the macintosh browser of 
this time) was doing miracle with that. You were updating the 
spreadsheet and the data in the HTML page were modified. It was neat.

Though some people fear the complexity of the modularity of XHTML and 
associated technology.

		



-- 
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***

Received on Tuesday, 28 September 2004 00:34:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:00 GMT