- From: Kornel Lesinski <kornel@geekhood.net>
- Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 00:53:44 +0100
- To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 23:12:03 +0100, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote: > XHTML documents served as text/html result in interoperable behavior > in typical cases, so that constraint is too strong. Please change > it to "SHOULD be sent..." and "SHOULD NOT be served...". Since none of the XHTML-specific featuers can be used in text/html mode, and HTML 5 allows some XML-like constructs, I suggest change in naming to end confusion between HTML, XHTML-as-XML and XHTML-as-text/html. If HTML 5 document is served as text/html, it's called HTML 5. If HTML 5 document is served as XML, it's called XHTML 5. Therefore "MUST" requirement could be kept for XHTML 5, because _by definition_ XHTML 5 in non-XML mode wouldn't exist. Interoperability wouldn't be harmed at all, because the interoperable subset of XHTML 5 documents could be sent as text/html, they just wouldn't be called XHTML 5, but HTML 5. -- regards, Kornel Lesinski
Received on Thursday, 30 August 2007 23:54:19 UTC