Re: Re: samp, kbd, var

On 8/22/06, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> Which still doesn't answer the thread starter: why are samp, kbd and var
> specifically still in this basic grammar, when they only refer to
> specialised types of content in a particular field?
>

I am also interested in knowing why these are still around in XHTML 2.
I can understand why they were passed onto XHTML 1, but now is the
first real chance to remove old stuff as XHTML 2 doesn't have to be
backward compatible.

I will be using XHTML 2 as the base for a document standard in a
specific field and the extensibility makes it easy to add my
domain-specific markup (or use RDF with SKOS to express what I need).
So I see no reason why XHTML 2 should conatin domain-specific markup
at all.

code and blockcode are also candidates for removal in my opinion.

Regards,

Peter