[xhtml2] list examples of where XHTML 2.0 is (in)appropriate

Hi,

This is a comment for "XHTML 2.0"
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml2-20060726/
2006-07-26
8th WD

Extracted from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2006Sep/0030.html

May I please have a tracking of this comment.

About http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml2-20060726/introduction.html

What is XHTML 2.0 for? The draft's introduction says:

> HTML 2 is a general purpose markup language designed for representing
> documents for a wide range of purposes across the World Wide Web. To
> this end it does not attempt to be all things to all people, supplying
> every possible markup idiom, but to supply a generally useful set of
> elements, with the possibility of extension using the class and role
> attributes on the span and div elements in combination with style
> sheets, and attributes from the metadata attributes collection.

This is a bit vague.

One of the nice things about the original HTML 1.0 draft is that it gave
some examples of how it could be used [*]:

> * Hypertext news, mail, online documentation, and
    collaborative hypermedia;
> * Menus of options;
> * Database query results;
> * Simple structured documents with inlined graphics.
> * Hypertext views of existing bodies of information 

With the proliferation of markup languages that we have today, I'd like
to see such a list make a return in XHTML 2.0. What's more, I would very
much appreciate a list of web content where XHTML 2.0 would *not* be
suitable markup. For instance, is XHTML 2.0 appropriate for marking up
blog posts, news articles, academic papers, critical editions of texts,
and web applications?

[*] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/draft-ietf-iiir-html-01.txt

-- 
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis

Received on Monday, 25 September 2006 10:14:17 UTC