- From: Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer <sebastian@dreamlab.net>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 23:44:44 +0200
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- CC: Maurice Carey <maurice@thymeonline.com>, HTML Working Group <public-html@w3.org>
Well said, Chaals. Cheers, - Sebastian Charles McCathieNevile schrieb: > > On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 20:05:20 +0200, Maurice Carey > <maurice@thymeonline.com> wrote: > >> If html5 is the official contination of html4.x and xhtml is an xml >> version of html4 and html5 will have an xml verion...why is there >> still a completely separate XHTML2? > > In short, because there is a market for it. Some of the people who > take money to adapt content in various ways are big fans of XHTML 2. > >> Aren't all the major browsers members of this working group and >> pushed for html5 to be the official new version? > > Yes. > >> Won't that mean there'll likely not be anyone implementing xhtml2 >> when/if they ever finish writing their specs? > > No. There are people who implement XHTML 2 stuff already. It is just > that there is almost none of it on the open web, and there are > difficulties in implementing the two side by side, so there is not > much obvious motivation for a major browser vendor to implement XHTML > 2. (In practice one of the goals of XHTML 2 is to use more generic XML > technology. For example many of the important features of XHTML 2 > already work in Opera, although not all of it - most notably we do not > implement Xforms so you need to use an extension if you rely on it). > > Cheers > > Chaals > > -- Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group > hablo español - je parle français - jeg lærer norsk > chaals@opera.com Catch up: Speed Dial http://opera.com >
Received on Monday, 25 June 2007 21:44:35 UTC