Re: What's the problem? "Reuse of 1998 XHTML namespace is potentially misleading/wrong" from Sam Ruby on 2009-02-12 (public-html@w3.org from February 2009)

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 09:58:33 -0500
To: Philip TAYLOR <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
CC: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <49943919.9030305@intertwingly.net>

Philip TAYLOR wrote:
> 
> May I respectfully suggest that "unnecessarily" is an
> unnecessarily emotive word when used in contexts such
> as the following, and that those seeking to comment
> on the perceived merits or weaknesses of a draft
> specification produced by another Working Group should
> restrict themselves to more neutral (and factual) language ?

My first stab at more neutral language:

   http://esw.w3.org/topic/XHTML-namepace

I expect this to be a significant topic of conversation at the AC 
meeting in March, and would like to go into the discussion with facts. 
I will encourage members of the XHTML2 working group to contribute to 
this list.

> Philip TAYLOR

- Sam Ruby

Received on Thursday, 12 February 2009 14:59:09 UTC