- From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
- Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 22:27:53 +0000
- To: Molte <molte93@gmail.com>
- CC: Shavkat Karimov <shavkat@seomanager.com>, HTML Working Group Discussion Mailing-List <www-html@w3.org>
Molte wrote: > I think both languages have advantages. I'll list some of the greater > ones (after my opinion) below. In practice, if W3C were to insist that there were only one combined language, it would either be essentially the same as the current HTML5, or the non-Microsoft browser developers would develop browsers for HTML5 and W3C would produce standards which they would ignore. That's because HTML5 is basically a creation of the mainstream browser developers, who are looking at what the mass market and marketing businesses want. With the XHTML2/HTML5 split, what you may well find is that there are companies that implement tools for using XHTML2, but they will be sold to businesses, particularly information based ones, rather than supplied to the general public. (Note Microsoft do not support XHTML either, but they would rather you used their proprietary document languages.) -- David Woolley Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want. RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam, that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
Received on Tuesday, 6 January 2009 22:28:58 UTC