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

Re: Is XHTML a dead end?

From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 01:12:19 +0200
Message-ID: <03e501c265b2$2a5bd280$7ef5a8c0@srx41p>
To: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@netfolder.com>, <Svgdeveloper@aol.com>, <mc@xegesis.org>, <www-tag@w3.org>


> But hey, does
> anybody in the HTML WG knows how to spell compromise?

Oh absolutely! I believe the HTML WG is very good at compromise, we do it
all the time. HLink is an example: we'll use XLink semantics but another
syntax; isn't that compromise?

Steven Pemberton

Received on Thursday, 26 September 2002 19:12:31 GMT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Steven Pemberton: "XLink: the architectural issue"
Previous message: Steven Pemberton: "Re: TAG Comments on XHTML 2.0 and HLink"
In reply to: Didier PH Martin: "RE: Is XHTML a dead end?"
Next in thread: Didier PH Martin: "RE: Is XHTML a dead end?"
Reply: Didier PH Martin: "RE: Is XHTML a dead end?"

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
Help: [ How to use the archives ] [ Search in the archives ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 12 September 2008 07:01:53 GMT