- From: Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@googlemail.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 20:01:47 +0100
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On 20 Aug 2007, at 19:45, Julian Reschke wrote: > > Lachlan Hunt wrote: >> ... >> Many authors have adopted the XHTML syntax for empty elements and >> the practice of including the trailing slash is now quite common. >> In order to assist with the transition from XHTML 1.0 to HTML5 in >> the future, the trailing slash has been permitted because it is >> harmless and forbidding it would require many authors to make many >> changes that have no practical benefit. >> ... > > Why would anybody who is using XHTML 1.0 right now (served as > XML!), want to transition to HTML5 in the future, instead of XHTML5 > (or whatever it will be called?). Many people serve XHTML 1.0 as text/html, as you are allowed to do. XHTML5 does not allow this. I don't think what those who use XHTML 1.0 as application/xhtml+xml do is overly relevant, as they are in the vast minority. - Geoffrey Sneddon
Received on Monday, 20 August 2007 19:02:02 UTC