Re: The only name for the xml serialisation of html5

On 2007-09-30 05:33:12 +0200 Dean Edridge <dean@55.co.nz> wrote:

[ ... how to speak about the two HTML 5 formats ... ]

> When a client asks a web designer what technology they use for 
> creating web 
> sites, do you expect the designer to say:
> "well sir, we use 'HTML 5 text' on most of our sites, and sometimes 
> we use 
> 'HTML 5 application' on others".

Indeed. It would be great if you said 'HTML 5 text' and 'HTML 5 
application'. That could raise the awareness about the issues with 
serving pages with the _real_ content type information. And if we pick 
'HTML 5 xml' instead of 'HTML 5 application', it would also help 
convey the idea that XHTML is actually just a variant of XML - it 
actually _is_ XML.

> Wouldn't it be easier just to say "we use HTML5".
> 
> And if the client asks "but what about that XHTML language I've heard 
> so much 
> about?"
> Then the designer can just say "Yes sir, we use XHTML5 as well, when 
> necessary".

Thanks for giving your idea some context. I think, that when the 
client asks about the technology, you say 'HTML 5', regardless of 
which of the two HTML 5 formats you are using. (But if you want to 
brag, you can add more ...).

When the client ask about XHTML, you say that HTML 5 comes in 2 
formats - one of them being XHTML, which you use when needed. You can 
also add that the entire thing about XHTML was previoiusly 
misunderstood.

The client, when asking, should not simply be feed the old stories 
about HTML and XHTML - as if nothing had changed in the understanding 
of these things.
-- 
leif halvard silli

Received on Sunday, 30 September 2007 12:38:23 UTC