- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 09:55:54 +1000
- To: public-html@w3.org
Dão Gottwald: > They're all awful. XHTML 1.5 is the only alternative that I see (I was > just about to propose that until I that it was done before). > > Besides, since XHTML2 has its own namespace, I don't think the XHTML2 WG > is in the position to tell us to not call the XML serialisation of any > HTML version "XHTML". FWIW, their language identifier is "XHTML2" to > which they should consequentially append any version number, e.g. > "XHTML2 1.0". As a reasult, "XHTML 5" (with a space!) is still on option > for us. While this thread is still around, I might point out this page, which deals with TR version numbers: http://www.w3.org/2005/05/tr-versions -- Cameron McCormack, http://mcc.id.au/ xmpp:heycam@jabber.org ▪ ICQ 26955922 ▪ MSN cam@mcc.id.au
Received on Monday, 2 July 2007 23:56:05 UTC