- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 13:33:08 +1000
- To: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
- CC: Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer <sebastian@dreamlab.net>, public-html@w3.org
Robert Burns wrote: > On Jun 26, 2007, at 9:03 PM, Lachlan Hunt wrote: >> Given that I have already explained how XHTML2 is seriously >> incompatible with XHTML1 in previous posts, why do you think XHTML2 >> deserves to be called XHTML? > > Your earlier post did not at all explain "how XHTML2 is seriously > incompatible with XHTML1". It simply listed some edge-case unresolved > issues in the WG. XHTML2 changes processing requirements, renames elements and attributes, and is incompatible with several DOM APIs. It is not merely a few edge cases and unresolved issues, they are fundamental flaws in the design. > I would hat to have to read someone producing the same list for HTML5. It would be great if someone would look for and document any unknown incompatibilities. They would be bugs in the spec, which can and should be fixed. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2007 03:33:23 UTC