- From: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 20:54:20 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
- To: "L. David Baron" <dbaron@fas.harvard.edu>
- cc: www-html@w3.org
On Thu, 20 May 1999, L. David Baron wrote: > XHTML 1.0 defines the namespace "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1" > [1]. However, if a future draft of XHTML defines the namespace > "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2", then it seems to me that this > namespace could (probably even should) go unrecognized by > clients that recognized the XHTML 1.0 namespace (at least in > documents with a MIME type of text/xml). > > Perhaps there should be some sort of rule defined now that says > what future namespace names will be used. Thus, rules for > forward-compatible parsing, like those in the XSLT draft [2], > could be defined. > > I fear that, without a clear statement of what should be > accepted as an HTML-in-XML namespace, different clients will try > to guess whether something is HTML in different ways (such as > looking for the namespace prefix "html"). This would be a > disaster. I think the solution will emerge from ongoing work on XHTML document profiles. The media type and/or namespace by themselves won't scale when we consider all the variants needed to match the increasing diversity of browser platforms. Regards, -- Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett phone: +44 122 578 2984 (or 2521) +44 385 320 444 (gsm mobile) World Wide Web Consortium (on assignment from HP Labs)
Received on Friday, 21 May 1999 15:54:03 UTC