W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2002

Re: Is XHTML a dead end?

From: Mike Champion <mike.champion@softwareag-usa.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 17:55:57 -0400
To: www-tag@w3.org
Message-id: <YSLJTPYXFD552OL823ZVS95JFPJPK1Y.3d93826d@MChamp>

Andrew Watt writes:

>"Is XHTML worth persevering with?

Well, let's consider the alternatives:

1 - HTML (4.0?):  How long will the industry live with its limitations?  Not forever.

2 - XML + CSS + some hyperlinking mechanism:  Well, that's my preferred scenario, but even if the W3C agreed on a 
hyperlinking mechanism TODAY, it would be a hard sell to non-geeks.  

3 - Flash or "Blackbird.NET" (a hypothetical IE-specific proprietary extension to HTML; I have no idea if it exists 
in a lab somewhere, but why would a dominant vendor fail to push the browser markup language forward if the W3C 
drops the ball?)

As much as I would like to live in World #2, World #3 seems infinitely more likely IMHO.  Nature and marketplaces 
abhor a vacuum; if the W3C doesn't advance the hypertext markup language standard to meet evolving needs, the 
marketplace will find something to declare a de facto standard. 

[off to read the "Flash MX Bible" that I bought the other day, sigh]
Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 17:57:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:11 GMT