> Hi, > > In the thread on renaming the html element type > (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2005Nov/0061.html), Sjoerd > Visscher wrote: > <blockquote> > I see only one good reason to change this, and that is to get rid of the > html/head/body structure. The latest WD makes a big step towards putting > meta data in the content. This makes it possible to drop the head > completely. > </blockquote> > > It is not necessary to get rid of the head, just because it is possible to > do this. Some people may want a clean separation between metadata and > content, as described in the Head-Body design pattern > (http://www.xmlpatterns.com/HeadBodyMain.shtml). If there are use cases > for > this pattern, why prevent people from using it? Given the direction XHTML 2 has taken with mixing meta data more with the content, this argument can go one of two ways: either the head-body design pattern is a bad one (with which I would agree) or is is a good one. If the latter, then it should also be possible to use the head-body separation with other elements. (why prevent people from using it?) greetings, Sjoerd Visscher http://w3future.com/weblog/ PS. In the mean time, let people get used to the idea that xml is not the ultimate data/document format, as there's clearly a need to have attributes that can contain structured data, not just strings.Received on Monday, 14 November 2005 12:29:20 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 6 April 2009 12:59:29 GMT