- From: Dean Edridge <dean@55.co.nz>
- Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 16:20:04 +1300
- To: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Cc: Adam Nash <adamn@wirespring.com>, public-html@w3.org
Leif Halvard Silli wrote: > Dean, I would like to hear if I interpreted your repeated claims about logical, semantic, simple etc correctly. Or could you, finally, explain what the logic-ness, semantic-ness and simple-ness about your proposal is? > > [... 'HTML 5 text' and 'HTML 5 xml' ... ] It's pretty obvious isn't it? > 'HTML 5 xml' ... ] Why is this -> 'HTML 5 xml' better than this -> XHTML5 Why should I have to explain the following: logic, semantic simple Why don't you explain how your idea is: logic, semantic simple I'm getting tired of debating something that is so simple and so obvious to most. It's already in the spec, go read it. -- Dean Edridge http://www.zealmedia.co.nz/
Received on Sunday, 30 September 2007 03:20:20 UTC