- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 12:38:16 -0800
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>, "William Loughborough" <love26@gorge.net>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
At 2:51 PM +0000 11/19/00, Sean B. Palmer wrote: > > What is the probability of browser support - or is that even >> a major factor? If I understand correctly any browser that > > handles HTML X.x and CSSx will qualify? >Yes, there are no compatability issues whatsoever. [...] >Any HTML groking browser that supports XHTML also supports m12n. Note that >additions with certin behavoiurs aren't automatically supported, but it >doesn't hurt to add them if they have a specific function. I think we need to be very careful how we state these things, especially when there are non-technical audiences in WAI who are reading them (the kind of people who _don't_ read DTDs and specs). I don't think it's fair to say that any HTML browser existing now will "support" modularized XHTML. The term "support" means different things to different people and in different contexts. I think we want to be careful here because any XHTML module we write won't magically "do anything" in any existing (or even possibly future) browser. The paragraph you wrote (quoted above) could easily mislead some members of this interest group to assume too much is capable with XHTML modularization and raise expectations too high. Any XHTML module we write will only be useful in as much as there is software (browsers, editors, evaluation tools, etc.) specifically written to use that module. --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://www.kynn.com/
Received on Monday, 20 November 2000 15:42:19 UTC