On 31 Aug 2009, at 11:45, Henri Sivonen wrote: > It seems to me that there's a difference of underlying premises here. > Premise 1: HTML5 obsoletes HTML 2.0, 3.2 and 4.01 and XHTML 1.x. > New authoring must use the latest level of the language. > Premise 2: HTML 2.0, 3.2, 4.01 and 5 and XHTML 1.x are all > Recommended. It is appropriate to author new pages using older > levels of the language. I think my suggested media type registration text is a reasonable compromise between these. It notes the existence of various different versions of HTML, but gives user agents the freedom to treat them all as HTML5 if they wish: http://www.w3.org/mid/1251457061.2394.75.camel@ophelia2.g5n.co.uk -- Toby A Inkster <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>Received on Monday, 31 August 2009 11:27:21 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:44:55 UTC