- From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 10:44:16 +0100
- To: public-html@w3.org
- CC: Bill McCoy <whmccoy@gmail.com>
On 26/01/13 18:44, Bill McCoy wrote: > situation will evolve over time. There's an increasing number of CMS > systems that are based on HTML as content rather than custom XML > formats like DITA or DocBook. If 2 years from now these systems > prevalently support "tag soup" for articles and other content > fragments then I think the answer will be clear. If 2 years from now > these systems prevalently store XHTML because it has led to other > benefits, that might be another story. Let me mitigate a bit the above: the Press is not using html internally; they use XML formats for very good technical reasons. Having discussed recently with a major european actor of that domain, they're absolutely not ready to switch from XML to a flavor of html for their sources or repositories. If they're deeply interested in EPUB to distribute content and daily or weekly press reviews, a xml serialization of html is for them a better fit at this time. </Daniel>
Received on Sunday, 27 January 2013 09:44:41 UTC