- From: Edward O'Connor <hober0@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 11:25:06 -0800
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
> HTML5 isn't being designed for incorporation in arbitrary generic XML > compound documents in any case. I think you're missing the most important XML compound document use case: syndication, namely, the use of XHTML within Atom's text constructs. As a content author, I intend my content for the Web, and don't intend to write different markup for my site as for my feeds. Thus, I plan to use XHTML5, not XHTML2, inside atom:content etc. Ultimately, there's nothing for this working group to do--the solution to the problem is for the XHTML2 working group to seriously pursue a language rebranding effort (including, but not limited to, changing their language's name & namespace) as envisioned in the W3C press release of March 2007[1]: > Those design choices have led to XHTML 2.0 having an identity distinct > from HTML. With the chartering of the XHTML 2 Working Group, W3C will > continue its technical work on the language at the same time it > considers rebranding the technology to clarify its independence and > value in the marketplace. 1. http://www.w3.org/2007/03/html-pressrelease
Received on Monday, 16 February 2009 19:25:47 UTC