- From: Robin Lionheart <w3c-ml@robinlionheart.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 04:32:35 -0400
- To: <www-html@w3.org>
David Woolley wrote: > I can't imagine The Register using such a feature if it existed. I doubt the Register will use XHTML 2.0 anytime soon. But when the time comes for newspaper sites to convert to XHTML 2.0, I think they would at least use <date>...</date> (without the time attribute). > My guess is the only uptake for such a feature would be from people who > were aware enough of the issue to code dates in an unambiguous way, > e.g. the ISO format, in the first place. The sort of developer who would uptake XHTML 2.0 is probably the sort of developer who would uptake <date>. "The feature is only useful if they use it." is a charge that could be levelled against <abbr> and other tags. They'll never use it if it ain't there. > Microsoft Word attempts to recognize dates, even when > only partially entered (for auto-completion) so the technology to > do this unhinted certainly exists. One could include heuristics to recognize many possible date formats in a visual browser, but that seems pretty impractical to me.
Received on Friday, 16 May 2003 04:29:49 UTC