Re: Yet seriously folks (was: italics)

I do not see any current (or future) need for a Grammar Module:

- The provided (xml:)lang attribute even offers a (IMO fully sufficient)
language specification.
- A Grammar Module would not prevent authors from publishing grammatically,
semantically, or textually wrong content (and content will never get really
or well validated... otherwise Babelfish and co. would have released a more
than 50% working translation engine, I guess).
- The site extent would get to complex (without any advantages, neither
related to content, nor CSS, nor anything else).

I rather tend to a (former mentioned) 'Minimal XHTML' than a bloated
'Maximal HTML' defining each word, better: each pixel on the screen.

 Jens Meiert.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ernest Cline" <>
> > It certainly makes as much sense for there to be an XHTML2 Grammar
> > Module as there does an XHTML2 Computing Module, Indeed, we've already
> > had several requested elements that would fit in such a module, one of
> > which, nr, is still under consideration.
> Whether or not there should be a Grammar Module (I'm ambivalent about the
> idea), I can definitely see a use for a Grammer XML language. Perhaps a
> xhtml-grammer profile could be created, similar to the  xhtml-math-svg
> profile, for those who need it?

Jens Meiert

Steubenstr. 28
D-26123 Oldenburg

Telefon +49 (0)441 99 86 147
Telefax +49 (0)89 1488 2325 91
Mobil +49 (0)175 78 4146 5

eMail <>
Internet <>

Received on Friday, 23 May 2003 03:00:44 UTC