[whatwg] some issues

On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 15:46:18 +0000 (UTC), Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Jul 2004, Jim Ley wrote:
>>I'm not sure that's really an appropriate answer, could you actually
>>answer the point - Why if the whole basis of the work is from that
>>paper are we not following the principles laid out in it?
> 
>Because changing fundamental conformance criteria of XML
>is not within the scope of the WHATWG.

So extending HTML, XHTML, and DOM and CSS are all within the scope,
but XML not.   What is the motivation for this - you're happy to
change the "NOT SGML" part of the WHATWG doctype, so changing the
basic conformance requirements underlying HTML isn't a problem for the
WG, could you explain why changing the basic conformance requirements
underlying XHTML are out of scope?

Jim.

Received on Saturday, 10 July 2004 11:41:25 UTC