- From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 03:46:28 +0200
- To: Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer <sebastian@dreamlab.net>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer wrote: > ... because it violates the principle > of cognitive dissonance. Things that > are different should be named different. > XHTML 2 and XHTML 5 are two totally > different animals, whilst the outside > impression would be that XHTML 5 > is the successor of XHTML 2, which > isn't the case since its a fork. > > Use case: Common Sense. > > Will result in: Even More Confusion. > > Suggestion: Rename XHTML 5 into > something different. It'll never be more confusing than "XSL Transformations (XSLT), a language for transforming XML documents into other XML documents, part of XSL, which is a stylesheet language for XML, and using an external selection mechanism called XPath". Let me add one thing : HTML and XHTML 1 are about the Web, the one we all browse today, the one my dad sees. Not XHTML 2. So if a spec should change its name, it's probably not this WG's. I have no problem at all with XHTML 5. </Daniel>
Received on Wednesday, 27 June 2007 01:46:34 UTC