RE: Valid XML

...
> * Jim Ley wrote:
> >How to we encourage sites to care about valid XML?
...
> Hi Jim, it is most disappointing to see that no-one responded 
> to your inquiry. I am now unfortunately in a similar 
> situation, I found that a new Wiki web site concerned with 
> W3C technology uses non-compliant XHTML all over the site and 
> asked whether this could be fixed. The response I got was
...
> I am not sure how to proceed. Did you find a good way to 
> approach bloglines? Or maybe other public-evangelist list 
> members could suggest an appropriate response that would help 
> encouraging them to use proper XHTML or HTML?

So let's be radical. Maybe the world won't adopt valid XHTML. After all,
there are lots of examples of the world failing to adopt the best
technologies (Betamax vs VHS; ...) and other more contentious examples
(political systems; religious beliefs; treaties on global warming; etc.)
[Note these are meant to illustrate theat there is no real world agreement
in these areas, not to argue on any particular side)

Within the W3C world, related concerns are being raised (e.g. the panel
session at WWW 2005 on Web Services Considered Harmful; the XML Futures
session in which the complexities of the XML family of specs was discussed).

So a question is: if the real world sticks with browken (X)HTML, what should
the eanglists do: keep pushing the same line; take on board the real world
reluctanace to go down our preferred route - or something else?

Brian

---------------------------------------
Brian Kelly
UK Web Focus
UKOLN
University of Bath 
BATH
BA2 7AY
Email: B.Kelly@ukoln.ac.uk
Web: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/
Phone: 01225 383943
FOAF: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/b.kelly/foaf/bkelly-foaf.xrdf
For info on FOAF see http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/b.kelly/foaf/ 

> Bjrn Hhrmann  mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de  
> http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22  Telefon: 
> +49(0)621/4309674  http://www.bjoernsworld.de
> 68309 Mannheim  PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78  http://www.websitedev.de/ 
> 
> 

Received on Thursday, 19 May 2005 07:56:57 UTC